CC BY
11
Выпуск 3 (43) Том - 2020
Псковский регионологический журнал. 2013-2021
ISSN 2219--7931 URL - http://prj.pskgu.ru Все права защищены Выпуск 3 (43) Том . 2020
Features of the territorial structure of the ethnic space of Central Asia at the turn of XX century
Манаков Андрей Геннадьевич
Pskov State University Russian Federation, Pskov
Аннотация
The ethnic space of Central Asia a century ago was undergoing radical changes associated with the national-territorial delimitation of the macroregion. These changes were caused by new installations of Soviet power in the allocation of peoples, consistent with the national policy of the young socialist state. To a large extent, this became possible not only because of the undeveloped scientific criteria for determining nationalities at that time, but also because of the incompleteness of the process of ethnic self-identification of the local population.
The purpose of the study is to highlight the main components of the territorial structure of the ethno-cultural space of Central Asia based on the census of 1897. The study is based on modern concepts of Russian cultural geography: geo-ethnocultural systems, geo-cultural (ethnocultural) space, ethno-contact zones, etc.
The study made it possible to determine the territorial linkage of ethnic core of geo-ethnocultural systems of the main nations of Central Asia, as well as ethno-contact zones (zones of overlapping geo-ethnocultural systems) that became "disputed" territories during the period of national-territorial delimitation. The most pronounced at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries was the territorial core of the Kazakh geo-ethnocultural system. The ethnic core of the Turkmen and Karakalpak geo-ethnocultural systems were also sufficiently territorially determined. The most difficult was the interweaving of ethnic territories of Tajiks, Kyrgyz, Uzbeks and other peoples in the modern territory of Uzbekistan, northern Tajikistan and western Kyrgyzstan. Particular attention is paid to the problem of "Sarts", who have Tajik roots, but switched to the Turk language, and during the period of national-territorial delimitation attributed to the Uzbeks.
Ключевые слова: Central Asia, census of 1897, geo-ethnocultural system, ethnic core, ethno-contact zone
Дата публикации: 19.05.2021 Источник финансирования:
This article was prepared with the support of the RFBR grant 20-05-00369 "Transformation of the ethnocultural space of the post-Soviet states: factors, trends, prospects".
Ссылка для цитирования:
Манаков А. Г. Features of the territorial structure of the ethnic space of Central Asia at the turn of XX century // Псковский регионологический журнал. - 2020. - Выпуск 3 (43) C. 42-57 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://prj.pskgu.ru/s221979310008989-0-1/ (дата обращения: 10.11.2021). DOI: 10.37490/S221979310008989-0
1 Introduction. Before the revolution the ethnographic map of Central Asia was rather different from the one of Soviet and post-Soviet times. National and territorial division during the first years of the Soviet power brought in some radical changes in the process ethno-cultural space formation. Since the formation of Soviet republics, "titular nations" were identified, the status of which consolidated even more during the post-Soviet time. Although, the process of creation of the "titular nations" was not simple, due to some problems of uncertainty of criteria of nationalities identification and other difficulties in ethnic identification of population of Central Asia in 19 th and beginning of 20th century, and later on due to some new policy of the Soviet power according to the national politics of the young socialistic state.
2 The goal of the research is to identify main components of territorial structure of the ethno-cultural space in Central Asia following the results of the First general census of the population of the Russian Empire conducted in 1897.
3 In particular some tasks of the research are identification of the areas of the ethnical cores of different degree of manifestation (for nations, which became the titular ethnic groups of the Soviet republic as a result of national and territorial division in Central Asia), as well as ethno-contact zones (or areas of overlap of national geo-ethno-cultural systems), which became the disputed territories during national and territorial division.
4 Level of the problem research and novelty of the research. In post-Soviet time there appeared lots of studies dedicated to the ethnical composition of population of Central Asia at the turn of the 20th century, which also used the data of the only prerevolutionary census, the first general census in the Russian Empire of 1897 ([5; 6; 9; 10; 16; 19] etc.). An explosion of interest to the topic relates to identified tasks of the new state organization onto post-Soviet area. Among the raised problems defined during the period of national and territorial division there were questions of ethnic geography and ethnic identity in pre-Soviet history of the macro-region([1; 2; 18; 21-23] etc.).
5 The current research studies the results of the population census of 1897 in Central Asia from the perspectives of modern concepts of national cultural geography. For instance, the research is based upon the concept of ethno-contact zones (ECZ), assuming the calculation of ethnic patchiness index (EPI) by Eckhel B.M.([11; 20; 24] etc.), the concept of geo-ethnocultural systems (GECS) [17] and developed at its basis a model of territorial structure of ethnocultural space. The latter was tested by us at the territory of Central Asia on the results of the population census of 1959 and 1970 [12].
6 Informational background of the research. The research is based on the results of the First general population census in the Russian Empire of 1897, published on the site Demoscope.ru/weekly1. The peculiarities of the population census are not the registration of nationalities, but allocation of population by the spoken language. Anyway, as our earlier research was dedicated to the analysis of the national composition of the population dynamics for a long period [11], it revealed the following groups of population, which can be considered as ethnic ones with certain reservations.
7 The population census of 1897 did not cover the whole territory of Central Asia, it did not include two enclaves, where the census was conducted partly. It was the case with the territories of two khanates, which were in allegiance from the Russian Empire, namely Bukhara and Khiva. The
population registration was carried out only in Russian settlement in Bukhara (10.3 thousand people), and in Khiva just for some few residents of the Russian Empire (about 4 thousand people). Both categories of population reflect the general ethnic composition of the population in those two khanates, that is why the data from those khanates were excluded from our analysis.
8 Results of the research. At the time of the population census conduction in 1897, the Russian Empire's domains in Central Asia included nine regions, as well as two khanates in vassalage (Bukhara and Khiva). Central Asia that time was divide into two parts: 1) Kyrgyz country, the land which became a part of Russia mainly in the 18th and in the first half of the 19th centuries (Ural, Turgai, Akmola and Semipalatinsk regions) - for future territories of Kazakhstan; 2) Turkestan, which became a part of the Empire in the second half of the 19 th century (Zakaspiysk, Syr-Darya, Samarkand, Fergana and Semirechinsk regions) - the future territories of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and partly Kazakhstan (its southern districts). We estimated ethnic rates at the 43 counties and one area (Amu-Darya, where half of its population was the KaraKalpaks).
9 The calculation of the language patchiness index (LPI, which was estimated similar to the ethnic patchiness index (EPI) by Eckhel B.M. [20]) showed that clearly pronounced ethno-contact zones (with LPI over 0.4) at the territory of Central Asia covered the outskirts of the macro-region, at that its central part presented itself mildly pronounced ethno-contact zones (with LPI from 0.2 to 0.4) or monoethnic territories (pic.1).
Pic. 1. Language Patchiness Index based on results of the First general population census of 1897
11 Borders in 1897: 1 — states, 2 — regions of Central Asia, khanates of Khiva and Bukhara, 3 — counties; 4 — capitals of Khiva and Bukhara khanates, 5 — centers of provinces and regions; Language Patchiness Index value: 6 — 0.6 and more (most polyethnic territories); 7 — from 0.4 to 0.6 (clearly pronounced ethno-contact zones); 8 — from 0.2 to 0.4 (mildly pronounced ethno-contact zones); 9 — from 0.1 to 0.2; 10 — less than 0.1 (monoethnic territories).
12 Numbers indicate counties of UralRegion: 1 — Uralsky, 2 — Guryevsky, 3 —
Kalmykovsky, 4 — Temirsky; Turgai region: 5 — Kustanaisky, 6 — Aktyubinsky, 7 — Irgizsky, 8 — Turgaisky; Aqmola region: 9 — Omsky, 10 — Aqmolinsky, 11 — Atbasarsky, 12 — Kokchevatsky, 13 — Petropavlovsky; Semipalatinsk region: 14 — Semipalatinsky, 15 — Zaisansky, 16 — Karkaralinsky, 17 — Pavlodarsky, 18 — Ust'-Kamenogorsky; Semirechinsk region: 19 — Vernensky, 20 — Dzharkentsky, 21 — Kopalsky, 22 — Lepsinsky, 23 — Pishpeksky, 24 — Przhevalsky; Fergana region: 25 — Margelansky, 26 — Andizhansky, 27 — Kokandsky, 28 — Namangansky, 29 — Oshsky; Samarkand region: 30 — Samarkandsky, 31 — Dzhizaksky, 32 — Katta-Kurgansky, 33 — Khotzhentsky; Syr-Darya region: 34 — Tashkentsky, 35 — Auleatinsky, 36 — Kazalinsky, 37 — Perovsky, 38 — Chimkentsky, 39 — Amu-Darya area; Zakaspiysk region: 40 — Askhabadsky, 41 — Krasnovodsky, 42 — Mangyshlaksky, 43 — Mervsky, 44 — Tedzhensky.
13 Comparison study of LPI rates distribution at the territory of Central Asia and a share of Great Russian (Russian) population (pic.2), allows to conclude that Russian colonization of Central Asia led to formation of ethno-contact zones (ECZ) in northern and partly south-western and eastern parts of the macro-region. In accordance to the theory of geo-ethnocultural systems (GECS) we can talk about the presence of the only county (Omsky) at the north of the macro-region, which can be considered as the inner periphery of Russian GECS (with number of Russians more than 50%), as well as of three counties, which can be seen as outer periphery of Russian GECS (with share of Russians from 25 to 50%). The rest of the territory of Central Asia can be seen as a socio-cultural field of Russian GECS with its strong (share of Russians more than 10%) or weak influence. We can make a specific mention of two remote from the main ethnic Russian territory "islands" with strong socio-cultural influence of Russian GECS: counties with centers in cities of Verny (now Almaty/Alma-Ata) and Askhabad (Ashgabad/Ashkhabad).
Pic. 2.Share ofpopulation talking Great Russian language, on results of the First general population census of 1897
15 Borders in 1897: 1 — states, 2 — regions of Central Asia, khanates of Khiva and Bukhara, 3 — counties; 4 — capitals of khanates of Khiva and Bukhara; 5 — centers of provinces and regions; share of population talking Great Russian language: 6 — 50% and more (inner periphery of Russian GECZ); 7 — from 25 to 50 % (outer periphery of Russian GECZ); 8 — from 10 to 25%
(strong socio-cultural field); 9
— from 5 to 10%; 10
— from 2 to 5%; 11
— less than 2%.
16 The total number of population of Central Asia (including citizens of the Russian Empire in Khiva and Bukhara khanates) in 1897 composed 7 million 746.7 thousand people, including Great Russians (Russians) 588 thousand people, that was 7.6% of the total population (fourth place among ethnic groups of the macro-region). The leading position in Central Asia in number was taken by the speakers of Kyrgyz-Kaisak language (3 million 787.2 thousand people or 48.9%). Later they were classified as Kazakhs (3 million 507.4 thousand people or 45.3%) and a little part to Kyrgyz (in Pishpeksky and Przhyvalsky counties of Semipalatinsk region). The largest part of the territory of modern Kazakhstan in 1897 was taken by clearly and moderately pronounced ethnic core of Kazakh GECS (with a share of the native population more than 50%), and only two counties of Akmola region (Omsky and Petropavlovsky), as well as Tashkentsky county of Syr-Darya region can be mentioned as mildly pronounced ethnic core (with a share of Kyrgyz-Kaisak speakers from 25 to 50%). Yet several counties to the south of modern territory of Kazakhstan (in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan) had rather high percentage of that language speakers and they could be considered as the territories, which were influenced by the strong ethno-cultural influence of Kazakh GECS (pic.3).
Pic. 3. Share ofpopulation speaking Kyrgyz-Kaisak language, accordingto the results of the First general population census of 1897
18 Borders in 1897: 1 — states, 2 — regions of Central Asia, Khiva and Bukhara khanates, 3 — counties; 4 — capitals of Khiva and Bukhara khanates; 5 — centers of provinces and regions; share of population speaking Kyrgyz-Kaisak language: 6 — 90% and more (monoethnic territory); 7 — from 75 to 90% (clearly pronounced ethnic core); 8 — from 50 to 75% (moderately pronounced ethnic core); 9 — from 25 to 50% (mildly pronounced ethnic core); 10 — from 10 to 25% (strong ethno-cultural fiend); 11 — less than 10 %.
19 Although, at the south-eastern periphery of the area Kyrgyz-Kaisak language speakers' local population cannot be seen as Kazakhs yet. Kyrgyz-Kaisaks of Pishpeksky and Przhevalsky counties of Semirechink region further on were counted as the Kyrgyz (Northern Kyrgyz). In this context it is necessary to consider a problem of connection of ethnonyms "Kyrgyz-Kaisak" with
"Kara-Kyrgyz". Previously they were considered to be the one nation, but sometimes low-land Kyrgyz-Kaisak (now Kazakhs) and upland Kara-Kygyz were seen separately [7; 8]. In reality the ancestors of modern Kyrgyz were at war with Kyrgyz-Kaisak, and in sources they were known as "Kara-Kyrgyz" ("Black Kyrgyz") or "Rocky" (that means mountain) Kyrgyz [6, c. 3].
20 Before the Russian governing the differences between Northern and Southern Kyrgyz were defined by their location in two different political entities. Northern Kyrgyz were in the state of tribal warfare with Kazakhs tribes and looked towards creation of their own state. They pegged the neighboring state as an enemy, which tried its best to prevent the creation of an independent Kyrgyz khanate. Finally, Northern Kyrgyz chose the way of free association with Russia and took part in Russian military expedition against Kokand khanate [16]. Afterbeing associated with Russia Kyrgyz tribes became a part of different administrative territorial units once again. SouthernKyrgyzwereassignedtoFergana region, which was created at the territory of Kokand khanate. AndNorthernKyrgyzfoundthemselvesinSemirechinskregion [16]. Due to incomplete ethnic self-identification it is very hard to say the exact number of native Kyrgyz in Turkestan region at the end of 19th century [5]. At the result of the population census of 1897 Sothern Kyrgyz were mentioned as Kara-Kyrgyz, and Northern Kyrgyz were totally assigned to Kyrgyz-Kaisak group [3; 15; 16].But one can see in Picture 4 that the clearly pronounced ethnic core of Kyrgyz GECS is associated with the area of Northern Kyrgyz settling, and the area of Kara-Kyrgyz speakers corresponds to a mildly pronounced ethnic core and to the ethno-cultural filed of the GECS. The general number of Kyrgyz in 1897 can be estimated in 480,000 people, that was 6.2% of population of Central Asia (the fifth place among ethnic groups of the microregion).
21
Pic. 4. Share of population speaking Kyrgyz-Kaisak and Kara-Kyrgyz languages(now Kyrgyz), Kara-Kalpak and Turkman languages, accordingto the results of the First general population census of 1897
22 Borders in 1897: 1 — states, 2 — regions of Central Asia, Khiva and Bukhara khanates, 3 — counties; 4 — capitals of Khiva and Bukhara khanates; centers of provinces and regions; share of population speaking Turkman language:6 — 75% and more (clearly pronounced ethnic core); 7 — ot 50 go 75% (moderately pronounced ethnic core); share of population speaking Kara-Kalpak
language: 8 — from 25 to 50% (mildly pronounced ethnic core); share of population speaking Kyrgyz-Kaisak language (Northern Kyrgyz): 9 — over 75% (clearly pronounced ethnic core); share of population speaking Kara-Kyrgyz language (Sothern Kyrgyz): 10 — from 25 to 50% (mildly pronounced ethnic core); 11 — from 5 to 25% (ethno-cultural field); 12 — less than 5%.
23 Picture 4 also shows rather clear ethnic area of Turkmen language speakers. Besides the Eastern part of the modern territory of Turkmenistan (which became a part of Russian Empire at the very end of 19th century) was occupied by clearly pronounced ethnic core of Turkmen GECS, and the western part by moderately pronounced ethnic core. Turkmen language speakers in 1897 composed 248,800 people or 3.2% of the total population of the microregion (seventh place among main ethnic groups). Even more clearly seen is the area of Kara-Kalpak settling (Amu-Darya area of Syr-Darya region), though is presents mildly pronounced ethnic core of the corresponding GECS. Kara-Kalpak language speakers in 1897 composes 104,300 people (1.35% of Central Asia population - eighth place among ethnic groups).
24 Modern researchers indicate that if the creation of Kazakh, Turkmen and Kyrgyz "nations" was not a problem in Soviet time, but with the creation of "Uzbek nation" there were some real complications [4, c. 29]. Distinguishing Uzbek as a titular ethnic group was a serious problem, that was a problem of "Sarts". As a result of the census of 1897 in Central Asia there were 968,000 Sarts (12.5% of the microregion population - the second place among ethnic groups) and only 726,400 Uzbek (9.4% of population - the third place among ethnic groups in Central Asia).
25 Ethnonym "Sart" was used at least from 11th century. According to most researchers Sarts have Tajik routs but differ from Tajik by Turkic language [13]. Russians usually understood simply urban or settled population of Central Asia by this term [14, p. 23]. That way that name considered as well settled population of Kazakh and Uzbek. In 19th century ethnonym "Sart" was used to indicate most of the population living in Fergana valley.
26 But already during the first years of the Soviet power, ethnonym "Sart" was out of use, it was decided to substitute it with "Uzbek" everywhere. What is more the new title "Uzbek" was often used to indicate "Turk in general" [1; 2]. During the short period of time between 1920 and 1924 "Sarts" became distinguished as "Uzbek", and already in the All-Soviet population census of 1926 it came out that there were no single Sart in Central Asia. That way, beginning from 1926 the ethnonym "Sart" has totally disappeared from the enthographic map of the region [13].
27 Picture 5 shows the areas of settling of population, speaking Uzbek and Sart languages. Native Uzbek settled western part of modern Uzbekistan, and Sart - its eastern part, as well as adjoining territories of modern Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan (pic.5). Notably their small numbers at the main territory of Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan indicate the fact that settled Kazakh and Kyrgyz were only rarely mentioned as Sarts.
Pic. 5. Share ofpopulation speaking Uzbek and Sart languages according to results of the First general population census of1897.
29 Borders in 1897: 1 — states, 2 — regions of Central Asia, Khiva and Bukhara khanates, 3 — counties; 4 — capitals of Khiva and Bukhara khanates; 5 — centers of provinces and regions; share of population speaking Uzbek language: 6 — from 50 to 75% (moderately pronounced ethnic core); 7 — from 25 to 50% (mildly pronounced ethnic core); 8 — from 10 to 25% (strong ethno-cultural field); 9 — less than 10%; share of population speaking Sart language: 10 — from 50 to 75% (moderately pronounced ethnic core); 11 — from 25 to 50% (mildly pronounced ethnic core); 12 — from 10 to 25% (strong ethno-cultural field); 13 — from 5 to 10%; 14 — from 1 to 5%.
30 In that way, the main ethnic components at creation of "Uzbek nation" in 20th century were Sart and native Uzbek. But some other Turk nations, which were not distinguished as separate ones, were also assigned to them. So, during the population census of 1897 some ethnic groups were distinguished by Russian officials to the best of their abilities. That caused a big confusion. It resulted in fact that e.g. in Fergana valley more than quarter a million Turk language speakers were left undistinguished [16, c. 76]. At that, the total number of Turk language speakers left undistinguished in 1897 was quite large - almost 440,000 people or 5.7% of the population of Central Asia. Especially large groups of Turk language speakers left undistinguished there lived in Tashkent county of Syr-Darya region, where they composed about 32% of population. Later they were of course mentioned as Uzbek. That way different Turk nations became the third ethnic component included in "Uzbek nation". Sart issue influenced the distinguishing of Tajik ethnos too. Tajik language speakers on the results of the population census of 1897, composed 350,300 people (4.5% of population or the sixth place among ethnic groups of the macro-region). But it needs to be mentioned that the main part of the settling area of Tajik was outside the territory under census of population, namely on lands of Bukhara khanate. At the territory under census one can distinguish a small area of moderately pronounced ethnic core of Tajik GECS (Khodzhentsky county of Samarkand region) and several adjacent counties with a mixed ethnic composition of population (pic.6). There could be a different situation at conduction of national territorial delimitation in 20th century if Sart could have been counted as Tajik "nation", that could be a case as we have seen it above.
Pic. 6. Share of population speaking Tajik, as well as Uzbek and Sart (in total) languages on the results of the First General population census of 1897
32 Borders in 1897: 1 — states, 2 — regions of Central Asia, Khiva and Bukhara khanates, 3 — counties; 4 — capitals of Khiva and Bukhara khanates; 5 — centers of provinces and regions; share of population speaking Tajik language: 6 — from 50 to 75% (moderately pronounced ethnic core); 7 — from 25 to 50% (mildly pronounced ethnic core); 8 — from 10 to 25% (strong ethno-cultural field); 9 — from 4 to 10%; 10 — less than 4%; share of population speaking Uzbek and Sart languages (in total): 11 — 75% and higher (clearly pronounced ethnic core); 12 — from 50 to 75% (moderately pronounced ethnic core); 13 — from 25 to 50% (mildly pronounced ethnic core); 14 — from 10 to 25% (strong ethno-cultural; field); 15 — from 1 to 10%.
33 Due to immense complexity of ethnic composition of population, strip settling of Uzbek, Kyrgyz, Sart and other Turk nations, as well as Iranian-speaking Tajik, the whole modern territory of Uzbekistan, west of Kyrgyzstan and north of Tajikistan represented clearly pronounced ethno-contact zone (see pic.1). The exception is provided by Oshsky county of Fergana region, where the largest part of population (96.8%) was presented by Turk speaking inhabitants. But mono-ethnicity of this territory is in fact only "statistical", as this category included different Turk nations with undefined languages. Below there is a scheme with main components of territorial structure of ethno-cultural space of Central Asia at the edge of 19-20th centuries (table). This scheme is based upon our earlier developments on Kazakhstan - Central Asia region (on results of population census of 1959 and 1970) [12].
34 Table Main components of territorial structure of ethno the end of 19th century
Components of territorial structure pf Components of territorial ethno-cultural space structure of Russian GECS
Inner periphery (clearly
Inner periphery of Russian GECS pronounced outer ethno-cultural 50%" Outer periphery 25-50%
zone)
Over lapping of outer periphery of Russian Outer periphery (clearly Mildly
-cultural space of Central Asia at
Share C°mp°«e«ts of Share of
r territorial ... ,
pf , , „ titular
i, structure of , ..
Russians population national GECS
GECS and mild ethnic core of national GECS (clearly pronounced ethno-contact zone)
Moderately pronounced ethnic core of national GECS
Clearly pronounced ethnic core of national
GECS
Overlapping of national GECS (clearly pronounced ethno-cultural zone)
pronounced outer ethno-cultural 25-zone) 50%
Socio-cultural field (moderate and clearly pronounced outer periphery of ethno-cultural zone)
1025%
Less than 10%
pronounced ethnic 25-50% core
Moderately pronounced ethnic 50-75% core
Clearly pronounced ethnic core
Mildly and moderately pronounced ethnic cores
over 75%
25-75%
35 Based upon this scheme and on results of population census of 1897 at the territory of Central Asia there were distinguished the main components of territorial structure of seven geo-ethnocultural systems (Russian GECS and six GECS of native nations). Among the ethnos forming GECS were only mentioned those which in 20th century became title nations of Soviet republics (five of SSR and one of ASSR). The distribution of distinguished components of GECS at the territory of Central Asia at the edge of 19-20th centuries is presented in pic.7.
Pic. 7. Components of territorial structure of ethnic space of Central Asia on results of the First general population census of 1897
37 Borders in 1897: 1 — states, 2 — regions of Central Asia, Khiva and Bukhara khanates, 3
— counties; 4 — capitals of Khiva and Bukhara khanates; 5 — centers of provinces and regions; 6
— inner periphery of Russian GECS; 7 — overlapping of the outer periphery of Russian GECS and mild ethnic core of Kazakh GECS; ethnic core of Kazakh GECS: 8 — clearly pronounced, 9 — moderately pronounced with strong socio-cultural influence of Russian GECS; 10 — mildly pronounced core of Karakalpak GECS (overlapping of Uzbek and Karakalpak GECS under the sway of the latter); 11 — Turk speaking Oshsky county with an unclear status; 12 — clearly pronounced core of Kyrgyz GECS ; 13 — overlapping of Kyrgyz and Uzbek GECS under the sway of the latter; 14 — clearly pronounced core of Uzbek GECS ; 15 — overlapping of Uzbek and
Kazakh GECS under the sway of the latter; 16 — moderately pronounced core of Tajik GECS; 17 — overlapping of Tajik and Uzbek GECS under the sway of the latter; ethnic core of Turkmen GECS: 18 — clearly pronounced, 19 — moderately pronounced with a strong socio-cultural influence of Russian GECS.
38 The most obvious at the edge of 19-20th centuries there is the ethnic core of Kazakh GECS (Kyrgyz-Kaisak language speakers be using the terms of the census of 1897), which to a large degree corresponds to the modern territory of Kazakhstan. Ethnic cores of Turkmen and Karakalpak GECS are as well quite clearly spatially defined. The most difficult interlacing of the main components of territorial structure have Uzbek, Kyrgyz and Tajik GECS, which is expressed in overlapping of ethnic cores and ethnic peripheries of different levels and orders. Theterritorial "knot" of these interlacing (ethno-contact zones) is Fergana valley. Complicated territorial structure of ethno-cultural space of Central Asia at the edge of 19-20th century created a host of issues at the implementation of national territorial delimitation during Soviet period, as it admittedly expects the presence of "disputed" territories among newly formed Soviet republics.
39 Conclusions. The conducted research revealed that there were some discrepancies to the ethnic picture of Central Asia during pre-revolutionaryand Soviet periods. Those discrepancies were caused both by the peculiarities of the conduction of the census of 1897, as well as by new regulations of the Soviet power, connected with designation of the national composition of the population.
40 The first discrepancy deals with nations living at the territory of modern Uzbekistan and participated in the formation of "Uzbek" nation. The problem of Sarts having Tajik roots, but changing into Turk language is about it, and during the Soviet time they became mentioned as Uzbek. In the same manner other Turk speaking population living at the territory of modern Uzbekistan was designed to "Uzbek nation".
41 The second discrepancy deals with the population of the future Kyrgyzstan. Accordingtopopulationcensusof 1897, to the native Kyrgyz (Kara-Kyrgyz) there was designed the population of Fergana region (former the territory of Kokand khanate). TherestofKyrgyzlivinginthesouthernpart of Semirechinsk region were then designed as Kyrgyz-Kaisak and thus were not seen separately from Kazakhs living to the north.
42 The most clearly seen at the edge of 19-20th century was the territorial core of Kazakh ethnos. Also, rather spatially defined were the ethnic cores of Turkmen and Karakalpak. The most difficult was the interlacing of ethnic territories of Tajjik, Kyrgyz and Sart at the modern territory of Uzbekistan, northern part of Tajikistan and western part of Kyrgyzstan.
43 The Russian population at the territory of Central Asia in 1897 was then rather small and composed 7.6% of the population in the region. Russiansconcentrated mainly at the border with Russian territory (north and east of the modern Kazakhstan territory), as well as to the south-east from Caspian Sea (west of modern Turkmenistan).
Примечания:
1. The first general population census in the Russian Empire of 1897. Allocation of population by the native language, in provinces and regions. [Electronical source]: URL: >>>> (date of reference: 24.03.2020); The first general population census in the Russian Empire of 1897. Allocation of population by the native language and counties of the Russian Empire, besides the provinces of European Russia [Electronical source]: URL: >>>> (date of reference: 24.03.2020).
Библиография:
1. Abashin S. N. (2019), Return of the Sarts? Methodology and ideology in post-Soviet scientific discussions, Antropologicheskij forum, no. 10, pp. 252-278. (In Russ.).
2. Abashin S. N. (2008), Reflections on "Central Asia as part of the Russian Empire", Ab imperio, no. 4, pp. 456-471. (In Russ.).
3. Aldasheva A. B., Telebaev G. T. (2016), Kazakhs in Kyrgyzstan: history and modernity, Kazakhs of Eurasia: history and culture. Collection of scientific papers of the International scientific-practical conference dedicated to the 300th anniversary of the city of Omsk and the 150th anniversary of the birth of A. N. Bukeikhanov, eds. N. A. Tomilov, Sh. K. Akhmetova, A. A. Ilyin, I. V. Tolpekom, Omsk, Dostoevsky Omsk State University, pp. 2-5. (In Russ.).
4. Alimardonov M. U. (2015), Central Asia and the formation of the Tajik Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic: national-territorial delimitation and autonomy, Pravovoe pole sovremennoj ekonomiki, no. 12, pp. 28-35. (In Russ.).
5. Batyrbaeva Sh. D. (2012), Ethnodemographic situation in the Russian Empire in the context of strengthening Russian statehood at the turn of the 19th — 20th centuries (on the example of Kyrgyzstan), Gumanitarij: aktualnye problemy" gumanitarnoj nauki i obrazovaniya, no. 1 (17), pp. 65-70. (In Russ.).
6. Brezhneva S. N. (2017), The peoples of Turkestan as part of the Russian Empire, Rossijskie regiony": vzglyad v budushhee, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1-24. (In Russ.).
7. Galkin M. N. (1868), Ethnographic and historical materials in Central Asia and the Orenburg region, St. Petersburg, Edition by Y. A. Isakov, 337 p. (In Russ.).
8. Grodekov N. I. (1889), Kirghiz and Karakirgiz of the Syr-Darya region, vol. 1, Legal life, Material compiled by G. Vyshnegorsky, Tashkent, Typolithography by S. I. Lakhtin, 205 p. (In Russ.).
9. Zotova N. A. (2003), History of the resettlement of Tajiks in the territory of northwestern Ferghana. Moscow, Miklukho-Maklay Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 232 p. (In Russ.).
10. Kalieva K. S. (2007), Documents and materials of archives on the organization and conduct of population censuses in Kazakhstan (1897-1926), Izvestiya Altajskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, no. 4-2 (56), pp. 61-65. (In Russ.).
11. Manakov A. G. (2019), Evaluation of changes in the ethnic mosaic of regions of European Russia in periods between the 1897, 1959 and 2010 censuses, Izvestiya Rossiiskaya Akademii Nauk, Seriya Geograficheskaya, 2, pp. 117-128. (In Russ.). DOI: https://doi.org/10.31857/S2587-556620192117-128.
12. Manakov A. G. (2020), Territorial structure of the ethnocultural space of Kazakhstan and Central Asia based on the results of population censuses of 1959 and 1970, Pskovskiy regionologicheskiy zhurnal, no. 1 (41), pp. 51-66. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.37490/S221979310008534-0.
13. Omurzakova T. O. (2019), The term "sart" in the historical sources of the Kokand Khanate, Duxovnaya situaciya vremeni. Rossiya XXI vek, no 2 (17), pp. 1-4. (In Russ.).
14. Ostroumov N. P. (1908), Sarty. Ethnographic materials. Tashkent: Printing house of the Central Asian Life newspaper, 296 p. (In Russ.).
15. Ploskikh V. V. (2016), Interim population census of 1916 (between two censuses: the First All-Russian in 1897 and the first All-Union in 1926), Vestnik Kyrgyzsko-Rossijskogo Slavyanskogo universiteta, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 202-206. (In Russ.).
16. Sulaimanov Zh. M. (2019), Kyrgyz tribes in the XIX century: between Russia and the Kokand khanate, Central Asia at the crossroads of European and Asian political interests: XVIII-XIX centuries. Collection of scientific papers of the international seminar. Alma-Ata, August 19-23, ed. D. V. Vasiliev, Moscow, OntoPrint Publishing House, pp. 64-78. (In Russ.).
17. Suchiy S. Ya., Druzhinin A. G. (1994), Essays on the geography of Russian culture, Rostov-on-Don, 576 p. (In Russ.).
18. Ferghana Valley: ethnicity, ethnic processes, ethnic conflicts (2004), eds. S. N. Abashin, V. I. Bushkov, Moscow, Nauka, 224 p. (In Russ.).
19. Central Asia as part of the Russian Empire (2008), S. N. Abashin, D. Yu. Arapov, N. E. Bekmakhanova, O. V. Boronin and oth., Moscow, New Literary Review, 464 p. (In Russ.).
20. Ehkkel B. M. (1976), Determination of the mosaic index of the national composition of the republics, territories and regions of the USSR, Sovetskaya etnografiya, no 2, pp. 33-39. (In Russ.).
21. Abashin S. (2012), Empire and demography in Turkestan: numbers and the politics of counting, Asiatic Russia: Imperial Power in Regional and International Contexts, pp. 129-150.
22. Abashin S. (2011), Ethnographic views on socialist reforms in Soviet Central Asia: collective-farm (kolkhoz) monographs, Exploring the Edge of Empire: Soviet Era Anthropology in the Caucasus and Central Asia, eds. F. Muhlfried, S. Sokolovskiy, Berlin, LIT Verlag, pp. 83-98.
23. Abashin S. (2012), Nation-construction in post-soviet Central Asia, Soviet and Post-Soviet Identities, Cambridge University Press, pp. 150-168. DOI: 10.1017/CB09780511894732.012
24. Manakov A. G. (2019), Spatial patterns in the transformation of the ethnic structure of the Russian population between the 1959 and 2010 censuses, Geography and Natural Resources, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 106-114. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1875372819020021
Features of the territorial structure of the ethnic space of Central Asia at the turn of XX century
Andrei Manakov
Pskov State University Russian Federation, Pskov
Abstract
The ethnic space of Central Asia a century ago was undergoing radical changes associated with the national-territorial delimitation of the macroregion. These changes were caused by new installations of Soviet power in the allocation of peoples, consistent with the national policy of the young socialist state. To a large extent, this became possible not only because of the undeveloped scientific criteria for determining nationalities at that time, but also because of the incompleteness of the process of ethnic self-identification of the local population.
The purpose of the study is to highlight the main components of the territorial structure of the ethno-cultural space of Central Asia based on the census of 1897. The study is based on modern concepts of Russian cultural geography: geo-ethnocultural systems, geo-cultural (ethnocultural) space, ethno-contact zones, etc.
The study made it possible to determine the territorial linkage of ethnic core of geo-ethnocultural systems of the main nations of Central Asia, as well as ethno-contact zones (zones of overlapping geo-ethnocultural systems) that became "disputed" territories during the period of national-territorial delimitation. The most pronounced at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries was the territorial core of the Kazakh geo-ethnocultural system. The ethnic core of the Turkmen and Karakalpak geo-ethnocultural systems were also sufficiently territorially determined. The most difficult was the interweaving of ethnic territories of Tajiks, Kyrgyz, Uzbeks and other peoples in the modern territory of Uzbekistan, northern Tajikistan and western Kyrgyzstan. Particular attention is paid to the problem of "Sarts", who have Tajik roots, but switched to the Turk language, and during the period of national-territorial delimitation attributed to the Uzbeks.
Keywords: Central Asia, census of 1897, geo-ethnocultural system, ethnic core, ethno-contact zone Date of publication: 19.05.2021 Citation link:
Manakov A. Features of the territorial structure of the ethnic space of Central Asia at the turn of XX century // Pskov region studies journal. - 2020. - Issue 3 (43) C. 42-57 [Electronic resource]. URL: https://prj .pskgu.ru/ s221979310008989-0-1 / (circulation date: 10.11.2021). DOI: 10.37490/S221979310008989-0
Код пользователя: 0; Дата выгрузки: 10.11.2021; URL - http://prj.pskgu.ru/s221979310008989-0-1/ Все права защищены.
