| Abstract: | Following a critique by the ethnographer V. I. Kozlov of the biological-geographical conception of ethnic history advanced by L. N. Gumilev, a seminar was convened at the Geography Faculty of Leningrad University to discuss the merits of Gumilev's work and of the critique. The consensus of the speakers was that Gumilev's model of ethnic development, treating mankind largely as a biological species and attributing the origins and disappearance of ethnic communities to biological factors, should be treated as a working hypothesis that still required experimental proof. Several participants said they could not agree with some of Gumilev's propositions, especially the existence of a psychic innate drive that is presented as the key element in the generation of new ethnic entities. But speakers did not question his right to present his views, and Kozlov's attack on Gumilev did not appear to find wide support. |
