However, it is not incidental that a number of investigators have come to the idea of confining the work to the village as unit, but it cannot become a defendable assumption. First of all, the idea itself of fixing any unit of investigation methodologically is erroneous. No such a standardization is possible, for it is the ethnographer who has to find out from his preliminary survey how he will go about with the differentiation of the material, — the ethnical units are not standardized and «village» is not a system universally practised in. Since it has already been fixed we may ask ourselves for the reasons of such a choice. There exist two fundamental conditions to be accounted for. Those who have fixed it were not trained in modern methods of ethnography. They attacked the problem from the sociological side the theory of which had been built on the facts of non-Chinese social experience. They even attacked it from a still narrower point of view, such as «rural economy» etc. Secondly, all of them had a rather confused idea about China while the Chinese themselves in their desire of reaching political unity, could not even think of China otherwise than a unit, a nation, which however might be built up of distinct ethnical and regional components [5]. Naturally, under such circumstances there remained only one odd chance of giving a scientifically motivated solution of the problem of the unit of investigation, in fact it was reduced to that technique, while actually it had the greatest importance of a methodological order.
When the regional groups are investigated the ethnographer will not remain indifferent to the socially differentiated groups both within ethnical and regional groups. They form the same ethnographical material without being differentiated in territory, they are differentiated in the so-called horizontal sense [6]. The methods of investigation are alike.
Before the ethnographer possessing a certain historical sense arises the historical aspect of the investigation. In fact, any ethnographer in order to understand the observed cultural complex has to use the historical method in his work. Therefore, in order to be prepared for this kind of work he has to master specific methods used by the ethnographers in their historico-ethnographical work. Of course, this holds good also for mastering the methods pertaining to the theory of cultural complex, of the mechanisms of changes and of the theory of ethnical units whicli equipment will save him from committing elementary errors.
How far the ethnographer has to go into details of his description depends on the character of the facts observed. Should there be found a great variety of cultural elements of importance, they must be described. Should there be unusual regularity in their associations, the phenomenon must be carefully investigated, for it may lead to the important historical and constructive conditions of the existing complexes. Much will also depend on the personal ability of the investigator and his competence, when facing the problem of selection of field ethnographers who must first of all be prepared for their work and must also be tried on some work or, still better, be trained in field work by experienced observers. However, here it must be pointed out that besides the above requirements the beginner must possess some special aptitudes for this kind of work, such as tact in dealing with the people to be investigated, a kind attitude towards them, the ability of observation, an unprejudiced, unbiased and, at the same time, critical behaviour in facing new facts and situations, not speaking of elementary honesty in dealing with people and facts. It is thus evident that not every candidate, educated and trained for this kind of work, may prove to be fit for ethnographical field work.
As to how long a period of time an ethnographical investigation may and should last cannot be defined, — all depends on the character of the material, its complexity and volume. Some groups may take an extremely long time, while others may occupy no more than what is required for registering striking differences [7].
I now leave aside the question of technical and other equipment for it is of strictly professional interest. However, I deem it useful to remark that the equipment depends on the totality of conditions of investigation including individual requirements of investigators, but in no case it should become a burden for carrying out the investigation. The same holds good for the expenses which generally speaking are not as heavy as in other kinds of field-work [8].
5. It is a mere misunderstanding originating from an inadequate knowledge of the nature of «nation», evidently supplied by those who wanted to «westernize» the Chinese, according to their own shape and small extend of knowledge. While abroad, being chiefly interested in political problems, the Chinese had only the choice between political and semi-political circles, where the opinions of the Chinese students had to be formed according to the aims of various «engineers» and practical sociologists, the first step to which was to win the sympathy of the Chinese youth by accepting their national aspirations. Such a behaviour affected not only practical sociologists, but also some physical anthropologists. So I have before my eyes the case of L. H. Duddley Buxton who published two popular books totally or partly dealing with the «racial problems» namely, », The Land and the People», , 1929 and »Peoples of Asia»,, 1925. He in a self-humiliating manner recommended himself (cf. Man, January a review of one of my anthropological publications) as belonging to the «plain bluntmen» of the kind of anthropologists whom he defined as «rather practical men”. He asserts that the Chinese being very uniform, are merely southern or a «Pareoean» branch of yellow man discovered in by his superiors, in spite of a number of observations which have demonstrated the heterogeneous character of the population. The same idea was expected from practical men who wanted to be pleasant to the Chinese youth, but did not know what kind of connexions exist between «race», «ethnical unit» and «nation».
6. «Horizontal» is a rather misleading term. It points out a pyramidal structure of the society in general which is not correct even as a metaphor.
7. I notice a kind of abuse of terms which define the character of the work undertaken. Sometimes a short trip within the city for collecting some data is styled «fieldwork». Indeed, we may speak of fieldwork as being different from that carried out in a library or laboratory, where the ethnographer comes into direct contact with the population. However, if such a work is irregular and unsystematic or carried out occasionally, it cannot be termed fieldwork which supposes a certain regularity and accomplishment. Furthermore, if the ethnographer has to be specially equipped and has to travel long distances with the aim of exploration, we can speak of an «expedition», which however should not be used to replace the suitable term «visiting», if the ethnographer travels to well known and easily accessible groups. To go to villages around Ningpo by passenger boat from Shanghai which was reached by the ethnographer with some ocean boat from other continents, and to spend a couple of weeks there, does not mean «field-work» either nor «exploration», nor «expedition». We may also specify two types of work, according to their character, namely, «stationary» and «sporadic». To stay for a long time in the same region for carrying out an exhaustive investigation, does not mean that the ethnographer has not to move from the spot; it means that he remains for a considerable period of time in direct contact with the object of his investigation; then we may speak of a «stationary investigation». If it is done with interruptions or during a fast moving expedition we may use the term «sporadic investigation» in there may be used all forms of investigations which will be conditioned by the character of the material to be collected.
8. Those who are interested in the details of technique of ethnographic investigations may find some remarks scattered in the Introduction of my book «Psychomental Complex of the Tungus». I consider it practical and very useful to prepare a special manual containing all needed informations for future ethnographer-explorers in.