Balakhonova Ekaterina Isaevna

Introduction. The 2023 was the anniversary year for anthropology, when 180 years were celebrated since the birth of D.N. Anuchin (1843–1923) and 140 years since the founding of the Museum of Anthropology of Moscow University. The jubilee year is the best time tо remember those, who without sparing their strength and health, contributed to the development of education in Russia. In the article, for the first time in literature, an attempt was made to recreate images of people who took the most active part in the formation of the ethnographic collection of the Museum of Anthropology of Moscow University.

Materials and methods. The article is based on the materials of the Museum's Book of Acquisitions, information from collection inventories and the scientific archive of the Research Institute and the Museum of Anthropology, as well as data from literature and other open sources. The chronological method was used in the work.

Results and discussion. The article presents information on 17 collectors, whose names are arranged in chronological order. The article presents data on the following collectors and donors: anthropologist and public figure N.L. Gondatti (1861–1946); publicist, archaeologist, and ethnographer N.M. Yadrintsev (1842–1894); Ambassador Extraordinary to Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay A.S. Ionin (1837–1900); military man and diplomat V.F. Mashkov (1858–1932); military man, linguist, and ethnographer S.G. Leontovich (1862–?); geographer and anthropologist E.I. Lutsenko (1876–1931); revolutionary and public figure F.Ya. Kon (1864–1941); entomologist and genealogist N.F. Ikonnikov (1885–1970); ethnographer and museologist D.T. Yanovich (1879–1940); zoologist and zoogeographer I.I. Puzanov (1885–1971); poet K.D. Balmont (1867–1942); anthropologist, Doctor of Biological Sciences V.V. Troitsky (1885–– 1952); as well as members of the Second Russian Expedition to South America (1914–1915): G.G. Manizer (1889–1917); F. Fielstrup (1889–1933); I.D. Strelnikov (1887–1981); N.P. Tanasiychuk (1890–1960) and S.V. Gaiman (1887–). Unfortunately, the size of the article allows only brief information about these people, while each of them is worthy of a separate study.

Conclusion. Many people took part in staffing the ethnographic department of the Anthropological Museum during the «Anuchin» times, but unfortunately, to date, it has not been possible to find any information about all of them. The author intends to continue the research. © 2024. This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 license

Introduction. The years 2025–2026 mark the 95th anniversary of the foundаtion of the State Museum of Anthropology at Moscow State University (1930) and the 90th anniversary of the unveiling of its racial exhibition (1936). These dates provide an opportunity to examine the history of an institution that played a significant role in the development of Russian physical anthropology and in the popularization of scientific knowledge about humans. A that time the racial exhibition at the State Museum of Anthropology, represented a rare attempt to demonstrate systematically the scientific inconsistency of racism—not through mere rhetoric, but through the consistent presentation of factual material about human races, their variability, and their interconnections.

Materials and methods. The reconstruction of the history of the State Museum of Anthropology and its exhibits was based mainly on literary sources: the article by N.N. Cheboksarov «The Racial Department of the State Museum of Anthropology of Moscow State University» (1936), and the articles by M.S. Plisetsky (1932, 1936, 1940), as well as archival materials from the Research Institute and the Museum of Anthropology of Moscow State University. This article aims to trace the museum's path from an academic to a public institution and to characterize the scientific content of its exhibits dedicated to racial studies.

Results and discussion. The racial exhibition of the State Museum of Anthropology at Moscow State University is a unique phenomenon in the history of science and museum studies. The methodological solutions developed by Moscow anthropologists remain relevant today. A.I. Yarkho's concept of the taxonomic inequality of racial traits allowed for the construction of a hierarchy of racial differences without any judgment. Demonstrating the variability of traits – age-related, individual, and historical – undermined notions of their immutability and determinism. Materials on miscegenation refuted the thesis of the biological harm of racial mixing. The ethnographic section demonstrated the independence of cultural forms from racial identity.

Of particular value is the documentation of Nazi racial policy «in real time». The 1935–1936 exhibition documented events in Germany – sterilization laws, ideological texts – at a time when it was impossible to foresee the consequences of these policies. The museum performed a function that today we would call monitoring.

Conclusion. The Racial Division as it existed in 1936 has not survived. But its principles – strict factuality, critical analysis of sources, and the distinction between science and ideology – remain relevant in any era in which human biological diversity is used to justify inequality.

Acknowledgements. The study was conducted under the state assignment of Lomonosov Moscow State University. The author thanks A.V. Sukhova and A.V. Stepanova for assistance in selecting photographic materials and A.A. Mukhin for assistance in processing the photographs.