News

Friday 29 January 2021

Seminar “Engaging China in Micro Intellectual History - Sinologists, Practitioners, and Migrants”

 
The members of the Institute of Oriental Studies (the Russian Academy of Sciences) delivered speeches at the international seminar “Engaging China in Micro Intellectual History - Sinologists, Practitioners, and Migrants” on the 29th January 2021.

The international seminar  “Engaging China in Micro Intellectual History - Sinologists, Practitioners, and Migrants” was held on the 29th January within the framework of the seminars series of the global academic project «Oral History – Epistemology of China Studies». (https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1fXbBy6FmLkmtvLpnCnORlx7PMc2lAPA2?usp=sharing 

Scientists from 8 countries and regions of the world took part in the seminar that was held in English using the Zoom platform remotely: Australia (Sydney), India (Delhi), Iceland (Dublin), Russia (Moscow, Vladivostok), USA (California), Taiwan (Taipei), Philippines (Manila), Japan (Tokyo). 

The scientific researchers of the Institute of Oriental Studies: V.Ts. Golovachev , N.V. Rudenko (Moscow), I.Yu. Zuenko, researcher of the Institute of History, Archeology, and Ethnography of the Peoples of the Far East, (the Far East Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences of Vladivostok) made presentations from the Russian side on the topic "The Russian Sinology in the Late Soviet & Post-Soviet Periods: the Trajectories of Evolution & Migrations towards Far East & Siberia”. 

The evolution of Sinology studies in the USSR and the Russian Federation included at least three interrelated areas and trajectories: institutional (organizational), personal, and intellectual. The reports identified and partially considered the main stages of institutional relocations. The first shift was the tectonic movement from Leningrad to Moscow, it began in 1950 and was followed by a powerful personal migration. The second stage of Sinologists ”great migration"within the USSR had taken place since the early 1960s and had coincided in time with the "internal Moscow dispersion". This dissemination was supplemented by a new moving trajectory from Moscow and Leningrad to the regions - to the regions  bordering on the PRC: Siberia, the Central Asia, and the Far East.

The deep crisis in the Russian-Chinese relations was the main reason for the Sinology center creation in Novosibirsk (on the basis of the Novosibirsk State University and the Siberian Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences) and its reconstruction in Vladivostok (on the basis of the Far Eastern State University and the Far East Scientific Center of the USSR Academy of Sciences). This crisis manifested itself in territorial disputes and border clashes in the areas Damansky and Zhalanashkol in 1969.

A few years earlier it had become obvious that the potential of Soviet Sinology had been used ineffectively and had been degrading already. Therefore, in order to satisfy that day practical demands, a regrouping of existing forces was required through its greater diversification and specialization.

The Sinology development revitalization in Primorye was facilitated by the Report and Resolution of the Central Committee Secretariat  of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union No. 112-5c of June the 1st and the 20th, 1978: "On Some Means for the Further Sinology and Oriental Studies Development  in the Far East." 

The indicated measures proved to be effective. The impact of its positive consequences continued to be felt in the 1990s. But the post-Soviet period was marked for the Russian Sinology by a long and deep decline of the leading centers. Many sinologists migrated from the Far East and Siberia back to the “West” (the western part of the former USSR), some of them had to migrate abroad. 

All these aspects and trajectories require further comparative research based on interviews for the project "Russian Sinology - Oral History", as well as the study of the relevant historical materials and documents.