“Patrakeevka — a Pomor village”: local identity features of the Patrakeevka village residents, Primorsky district, the Arkhangelsk Oblast

The identity of the population of the coast of the White Sea has only recently become the subject of scientific research. The local identity of the Koida village of the Mezensky district of the Arkhangelsk region is the subject for N.V. Drannikova’s research [1]. The Pomor identity issues among the population of Kandalaksha coast are discussed by I.A. Razumova [2]. Contemporary folklore and ethnographic tradition of the White Sea coast is of interest for T.A. Bernshtam, A.P. Filin, M.D. Alekseevsky, A.I. Vaskul, I.V. Kozlova, N.G. Kamelina, N.V. Drannikova, T.N. Morozov [3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8, 9; 10; 11.].

In July 2015, there was an organized folklore-ethnographic expedition to the municipality Patrakeevka of the Primorsky district of the Arkhangelsk region. The aim of the expedition was the study of local identity and the fishing tradition of the Winter Coast of the White Sea, often associated with fishing and hunt. The study is based on the data collected during the folklore-ethnographic expedition of the Northern (Arctic) Federal University (NArFU) to Patrakeevka village. The NArFU students took part in the expedition headed by N.V. Drannikova. Thirty locals aged 40-90 were interviewed during the expedition. The recordings made consist of descriptions of symbolic and everyday commercial practices, superstitions and beliefs about local fisheries, sto- ries about the past of the village and the Pomor calendar. The data collected is placed in the Archive of the NArFU Center for the Study of Traditional Culture (hereinafter — FA NArFU), Fund 16, folder 615.

Methodology

The object of the study is “field materials” and self-describing traditions in them. The data was collected during the field dialog with the use of traditional methods of collecting: conversation, interview, and survey combined with participant observation method.

In the article, we use the terms: tradition, local identity, cultural space, local micro group, the settlement group, and oral story. Methodologies that are suitable for the study of sustainable peasant cultures and preserve them in museums, poorly correspond to the situation when urbanization is not limited only to cities, and agricultural culture transforms into the industrial one. The problem, says L. Honko, could be solved by the study of cultural identity of local communities, if people are interested in its preservation and maintenance [12]. They operate this knowledge, even if they cannot clearly express it. The term tradition is used here with several meanings. First, it is a mechanism of socialization and inculturation of the people, the channel for storage and transmission of information and values from generation to generation; second, it means elements of social and cultural heritage we place to the folklore archives; thirdly, it is the experience and knowledge of a social group.

Honko L. describes the concept of “tradition” as a broader identity than the cultural one. The researcher understands identity as a term of the second order and sees it as part of a collective tradition, dedicated to representing the group in cultural communication [12]. Local identity (hereinafter LI) — the identification of a person with a place of residence. The concept of “cultural area” we use to denote the geographical area of close artifacts and cultural phenomena. The population of one village, we believe, is possible to be called a local micro-group, as it is a specific cultural space with a distinct identity [13, Drannikova N.V., p. 30]. The settlement group is a group of villages that exists over a long period of time. In the article, we rely on a speech genres classification by M.M. Bakhtin [14]. Oral stories are the primary speech genres that occur in a dialogue. K.V. Chistov emphasized the difficulty of isolating the oral story [15]. Along with the speech genres, we use the common folklore genre classification, which is based on substantive, formal and pragmatic characteristics. The term “tradition”, we understand as the text that refers to the past.

Historical and cultural characteristics of Patrakeevka village

The village Patrakeevka is situated at the Winter Coast of the White Sea, 70 kilometers away from Arkhangelsk and a few kilometers from the sea, in the part called Sykhoe More. It is a broad, shallow reach with sandbanks, North of Berezovsky mouth of the Northern Dvina River and is part of the Dvina Bay of the White Sea. The Winter Coast is a part of the coast in the southern part of the White Sea. It starts from the mouth of the river Northern Dvina and ends with the Cape Voronov. Patrakeevka village is located on the banks of the river Mudyug. Currently it consists of five settlements: Verkhove, Kushkushar, Navolok, Gorka and Patrakeevka. 3 kilometers from the village Kad’ and 25 from the villages Kuya and Kozli.

We were not able to find any information about the date of the Patrakeevka foundation day. Researchers agree that Patrakeevka parish, formerly Mudyugsky, was formed during the 16th century [16, Leontev A.I., p. 144]. Since its residents were engaged in maritime trades, seafaring and navigation, it was one of the richest counties in the Arkhangelsk region, and its residents had a higher cultural level than the residents of other villages on the Winter Coast of the White sea. The village got school is much earlier than other localities. Many of its residents were literate before the nineteenth century. E.g., parish schools in Arkhangelsk province began to appear at the end of the XIX century. Interest in education had been increasing that time, especially after 1908, when Russia began the implementation of a program of primary education2. Schools in the villages were opened by decision of the rural societies. The population of Patrakeevka wanted children to be literate, so they could serve as sea pilots in the future. In 1841 in Mudyug a skipper school was opened. The Treasury kept it3. Since 1849, they had a village school, where boys and girls could study together4. We know about a high level of life of the Patrakeevka villagers from the information published in 1915 in “Lociya Belogo Morya”. It was noted there that “the Patrakeevka parish had a population of 1,762 people, 3 churches and 339 houses, 246horses, 286 horned cattle, 1014 sheep, 68 seaworthy vessels, 89 karbasses and 156 boats”5. In 2015, in time of our expedition, the population of the village was 335 people. Among the churches mentioned in “Lociya”, in Patrakeevka, there were only two: the wooden St. Nickolas church built in 1744–1746 and the brick church of Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary built 1870–1878, the church of the Three Saints was in the village of Kad’. In Soviet times, churches were almost destroyed, and now the locals are trying to restore them.

Patrakeevka village like the other villages along the coast of the White Sea has a fishing type of housekeeping and culture. Most of its population was involved in shipping, shipbuilding and various fishing activities related to the fishing of salmon, herring, сoregonus and flounder, or under ice fishing of cod and smelt and marine mammals hunt. At the same time, the villagers were engaged in pastoralism and agriculture, which did not receive much development here. In the revolutionary time, Patrakeevka was widely known by its shipowners, who, according to the residents, had “more vessels than in Arkhangelsk”. On the boats, they went to Norway for trade, which took place in the coastal Norwegian settlements, ranging from settlements located near the Kola Peninsula to the town of Tromsø. The residents of Patrakeevka village were carrying timber, lumber, hemp, tar, dishes, flour and other products to Norway. They bartered goods for fish and sold the fish upon their return to Arkhangelsk [17, Popov G.P., Semin A.A., Burkov G.D.; 18, Nur-peisova A.V, p. 11]. In the 19th – early 20th century, the government introduced concessions for the trade and construction of ships, which stimulated the development of exchanges between the White Sea population and Norwegians. During the Civil war, many of the Patrakeevka’s residents who had sailing boats and their families moved to Norway6.

In 1929, the agricultural artel “Krasnoe Znamya” was created in Patrakeevka, and in 1933, it transformed into a fishing collective established for coastal fishing and production of bottom and oceanic fish species in the Barents Sea and the Atlantic Ocean. In the 1990s, the new social and economic situation has severely demoted the status of fishing collectives.

Analysis

The level of self-identification of the local community and the awareness of its residents about its distinctiveness had proved to be rather high. Most of our respondents thought they were Pomors. Pomors — is a Russian-born ethnic group. Its members live on the coast of the White Sea and are engaged in marine fisheries. Our question about whom else in the Arkhangelsk region could they call Pomors was answered like that: “ the most Pomor people are Mezency, Primorjane (residents of the Primorsky district) and Onezhane, up to Kholmogory – everybody are Pomors ” (S.I. Burkov, born 1948). The identity the local community was closely linked to the memories of indigenous fisheries. Its particularity is hidden in the widely spoken proverbs: “ The Sea is our field”, “who has never been to the sea, did not pray to God ” ad others that perform the integrating function.

Another feature of the identity of the Patrakeevka residents is their belief in cultural affinity with the residents of Arkhangelsk: “Arkhangelsk, Solombala and Patrakeevka are the one”, they say. Solombala is an island part of Arkhangelsk; it became a part of the town rather late. The locals note the proximity of Patrakeevka village from Arkhangelsk by saying that they “traveled with samovars on sea boats7 from Patrakeevka to Solombala” (A.G. Kokorina, born 1938). Our respondents categorize residents of Arkhangelsk as “theirs” and do not separate themselves from them. The Patrakeevka villagers believe that the residents of Arkhangelsk, means they, are well treated and “respected everywhere”. This conviction is because, in Soviet times, Arkhangelsk ships and boats were welcomed in every world port they came. The residents of Patrakeevka and Arkhangelsk use the same local-group nickname (hereinafter — LGN) — treskoedy (“cod eaters”). Its existence is a witness of a well-developed local identity of a micro group. The origins of this LGN our respondents explained by saying that cod was their favourite food (“from cod, in fact, people have lived before...”). The nutritional basis of the coastal villagers was fish. The role of the fish was particularly great in the war-hungry years. A second explanation is the participation of the locals in the Murmansk cod fisheries (“the basic fishing was the fishing of cod”).

In addition to the endomyn-selfnaming, the Patrakeevka residents have some more LGN, one of which, like the previous LGN, is linked to the fishing activities of the local population — revcheedy (“ revcha eaters ”). (“ There is the fish Revcha (Cottus quadricornis)⁸, it looks so terrible, so lumpy. The villagers catch it and eat” [13, Drannikova N. V., p. 330]). Both nicknames are well known for the residents of the neighboring villages. The villagers of Patrakeevka accept nickname the Turks/Patrakeevka Turks, used by the neighboring community. In Russian folk culture, the ethnonym “Turk” is associated with the ignorance of the rules, cultural backwardness and violation of the social norms. Other ethnic anthroponyms are associated with the category “foreign”. Our respondents’ explanations explicit these associations.

“Patrakeevka villagers are the Turks. People said: “ a priest was exiled to Mezen, he was driving by, and the elder woman did not allow him to sleep in her hous e”. The priest replied, “What Turks!” Others say that it was Voroshilov” (V.N. Zamyatin, born 1937); “ Patrakeevka — Turkey. Kliment Ephimovich Voroshilov was in exile, ran from Mezen and he was not welcomed”. (J.D. Zamyatina, born in 1942)

Means the argument of the nickname origin is an indication of the prevalence of this information, represented by a formula of “rumors and thoughts” — they say. Instead of taking the priest for the night or in the second variant, K.E. Voroshilov, the people of Patrakeevka refused to let them in. Their actions violated the set-standards of behavior and corresponded to the percep- tion of “alien” in popular culture. K.E. Voroshilov seems to be a kind of cultural hero of the Northeastern part of the Arkhangelsk region. Similar anecdotal texts about K. E. Voroshilov exist in other localities along the coast of the White Sea (e.g., in the village of Dolgoschelye of the Mezensky district and the village of Lopshenga in Primorsky district) [13, Drannikova N.V., pp. 315–316; p. 329]. Explanations about the origin of this LGN contain a play on the geographical position of Patrakeev-ka and Turkey – near the sea: “Turks are behind the Black Sea, and Patrakeevka is behind the Dry Sea”. (A.G. Kokorina, born 1938)

Residents of Patrakeevka are proud to call their village a captain's village . They explained this paraphrase by claiming that only in 1960s-1980s in the town of Murmansk there were 40 captains — natives of this village: “ In Murmansk more than forty of our captains lived. Patrakeevka is the so-called captain's village ” (S.I. Burkov, born 1948).

Many captains are out of there. Kopylovs, Borkows, Kopytovs, Strelkovs — many captains. Now it is Antufiev, what is his name, Valera Funnikov are captains. These are the present, and earlier — Lapin, my father – a captain, Strelkovs from Kad’, and then Antufiev from Patrakeevka. (T.A. Kopytova, born 1947)

The formulas “ a lot of captains ”, “ what a captain ” were pronounced during the conversation for several times. It strengthened the credibility of the respondent’s story. In recent decades, there was one more circumlocutory name of Patrakeevka — “ Patrakeevka — the birthplace of captains and sailors ” intertextual associated with the title of the book by G.D. Burkov “Patrakeev-ka — Pomor village, the birthplace of captains” [19]. In this case, the name is case-text in relation to the resulting rephrase.

One of the factors to update the identity is the possibility of inter-group comparison, which represents the foundations for evaluating “their” and “foreign” groups. In a situation of comparison (and opposition, in certain cases,) with a group of “strangers”, the villagers have a clearly defined criterion of identity. Kinship and economic relations closely linked the villages of a cultural micro area with the center in Patrakeevka. Despite this, when arguing, the villagers called each other by nicknames. E.g., the Kuya villagers were called propubniki (“holemakers”). It demonstrates the cultural and economic features of the local community. Motivational reflection connects the origin of the nickname with a great number of ice-holes in winter, made by the villagers: “the ice-holes were made, and each family had its own” (A. Kokorina, born 1938). The Kuya village had one more LGN well known to all the surrounding villages, which may have preserved the memory of the first settlers — the people of Novgorod: “people say the first settlers were from Novgorod”. (E.M. Padzior, born 1929). The neighboring village Kozli was called with an ornithologi- cal name, popular in the Northeast of the Arkhangelsk — chabar (a baby gull)9. The second naming of the village is pskovichi/pskovityane (people from Pskov).

“We have, then, something like this: people married in Kozli and moved to Kuya, married in Kuya and moved to Kozli. The sharing of blood occurred. Some of them were called novgorodtsi, the others — pskovityane. Some of them were prorubniki, but I do not remember: the novgorodtsi may be... I can't remember: novgorodtsi was the name of people from Kozli or Kuya, but, in general, novgorodtsi and pskovityane, and prorubniki — made ice-holes only”. (A. Kokorina, born 1938)

During meetings of the residents of different villages, the LGNs performed the function of disengagement of the micro-group.

Except for the residents of Arkhangelsk, the Patrakeevka residents consider the communities of neighboring villages Lapominki, Poborki, Lodma and Izhma, located within a radius of approximately 50 km, as “we”. The territory of these settlements, including Arkhangelsk and its island part of Solombala and the villages Kuya and Kozli mentioned above, form a cultural micro area. Residents of settlements married, the land they are located is an area of distribution of certain local cultural types and traits related to marine fisheries. Residents of Patrakeevka know the LGNs and sayings of these settlements.

The stereotype of the “alien” contributes to the establishment of local identity. Residents of the Pomor villages Koida and Ruchii, 170 km away from Patrakeevka in the Mezensky district, are not considered as “we”. Therefore, the Patrakeevka villagers do not know their nicknames. The neighboring village Zimnyaya Zolotitsa is located 82 km from Patrakeevka and is part of the Primorsky district, the residents of Patrakeevka opposed themselves to its population: Zolotitsa is “our”, but at the same time, it is a “stranger”. The Patrakeevka villagers did not like the Zolotitsa residents because they, in their opinion, were loners and were in a bad contact with the more educated people from Patrakeevka. The latter know the LGN of the Zolotitsa residents — demon . According to popular belief, the representatives of the “other” world can cause changes in the weather. The residents of Zolotitsa were associated with the belief that their appearance on the sea causes the bad weather (V.M. Firsov, born 1950).

Despite the population of the Pomor villages located at a great distance from Patrakeevka, its residents oppose themselves to the population of the villages located in the forest, and the Cossacks. Although the local community has beliefs about spirits – the “masters” of nature and cultural space: wood-goblins, water spirit and mermaids, hostess of the log hut 10 and brownies, but at the same time the narrators say that the data representations are more typical for inhabitants of the "forest" villages, which are less educated than they are.

When during a field dialogue, the question about the attitude of the Pomors to the Cossacks arose the Patrakeevka villagers believed that the Cossacks had lived more easily than Pomors, because of better climatic conditions and that they had had an ego and a penchant for buffoonery. Pomors’ priority over the Cossacks, according to our respondents, is that the Pomors mastered the Arctic, Siberia and Alaska. Pomors are explorers, travelers, and conquerors of Siberia, the Far East and Alaska: native of Solvychegodsk in the Vologda province — E.P. Khabarov, Velikiy Ustyug — Semyon Dezhnev, the conqueror of Siberia — Yermak Timofeyevich, born in the town of Kargopol, the founder of Russian settlements in Alaska and its first Governor — A.A. Baranov. One of our narrators came into a rhetorical argument, claimed that the Cossacks were not capable of such difficulties and trials: “ What are the Cossacks? Cossack went South, I agree, but here… Pomors went by the Sea! The family names are our ” (S.I. Burkov, born 1948).

In the past, the local community opposed not only the Cossacks, but also the Nenets — representatives of the Samoyedic people on the territory of Mezensky district of the Arkhangelsk region and Nenets Autonomous district. Currently, the Nenets stopped visiting Patrakeevka, but before they were treated with concern and were considered sorcerers.

Well-preserved historical and cultural memory relates to cultural context of the local identity of the Patrakeevka villagers. “Social memory” unites the group and differentiates it from the others. We have oral stories about the historical past of the village among our records. The stories are on the foundation of the village, the raids by Norwegians, seafarers and shipowners, prerevolution relations with Norway, the old believers, the dispute with the Solovetskiy monastery of usali, visit to the Solovetsky monastery, the Civil war and intervention. Among the latest are the stories about the escape prisoners of the red army from the prison created by the interventionists on the island of Mudyug, cannibalization, etc. “Memories” about the Novgorod origin are an integral part of any local community history. In popular versions and oral tradition, the first settlers of Patrakeevka came from Novgorod, which, according to residents, were running there from Moscow Tsar or, according to another version, were deported after the annexation of Novgorod by the Moscow Principality at the end of the 15th century: “All our ancestors were deported from Novgorod by Ivan The Terrible” (V.N. Zamyatin, born 1937). In “A Brief Historical Description of the Parishes and Churches of the Arkhangelsk Eparchy” in 1894, the description Mudyug parish contains the record of a folk story, made in 1822 by a local priest Avenir Rozhin. The text supports the idea that the first settlers of Patrakeevka came from Novgorod11.

In the local tradition keeps the division of family names on Novgorod and Moscow. In folkspeech discourse, Novgorod Moscow are opposed to each other. Respondents are proud of their “Novgorod” origin. They give their Novgorod ancestors such traits as resourcefulness and freedom. The auto-stereotypes they use are to characterize their own local small group.

In Patrakeevka, legend about three brothers – Negodyai, Bezborodiy and Morozko is widespread. The main motive of the legend is their abandonment of the Novgorod because of “the wrath of Ivan III”. The villagers think their names are the origin of the local family names Nego-daev, Bezborodov and Morozov. The second version, less spread: the first settlers came to Mudy-ug from the village Orletsy, located up the Northern Dvina River, 120 km from Arkhangelsk, where, according to tradition, they had clashed with the locals, who, after the defeat from Novgorod, went over the Ural. (S.I. Burkov, born 1948). The folk tradition of the settlement of combines two layers of knowledge: the first – about the historical homeland and the second – on close contacts of the Dvina residents and the Patrakeevka villagers. In folk prose, tsars Ivan III and Ivan the Terrible constitute one-mythological image of Tsar Ivan, who defeated Novgorod and then annexed it. In these stories, the image sometimes referrers to Ivan III, and sometimes to Ivan the Terrible. The narrator adopts the story, so the collector would understand it.

Cultural context of many oral stories is linked to the personality of the performer — S.I. Burkov (born 1948). He is a good storyteller, reads a lot and is interested in the history of his village and worked as the head of the local communication node for a long time and travelled a lot along the coast. The Finnish scientist M. Suojanen introduced the classification of different types of storytellers. When using it, we include S. I. Burkov to the observer-analyst type. He did not only present familiar material, but at the time, he gave assessment and links and conducted various associations.

In the folk-speech tradition, three brothers of Patrakeevka are mythologized characters. The motive of the brothers-pioneer has a nationwide existence. As G.N. Krynychnaya mentions, this contributed to “the preservation of the tribal relations, the settlement of the territory by related groups — patronymic, the breakdown of the extended Patriarchal family” [20, p. 12]. In the Russian North, these stories present tales about the Chud settlement, the foundation of villages made by the settlers running from the foreign invaders or runaway soldiers. Y. I. Smirnov [21] in- vestigated the story of two brothers, who built a village, throwing each other an axe from one bank of the river to the other. Even though some of his versions have “Chud” motives (E.g., the legend of Konchak), Y.I. Smirnov, relying on the texts written in the southern regions of Russia, Bulgaria and Lithuania, convincingly proved Slavic origin of this story. He considered the options of this text with similar motifs [21]. In the legend about the establishment of settlements in Garnitsky Bay (Zaonezhye), its first settlers are brothers, fled from Novgorod. The legend of the brothers-pioneer, who through an axe to each other while constructing the village, still exists in the village of Valdeevo in Konosha district of the Arkhangelsk region [22, Drannikova N.V., p.34].

Our field recordings 2015 contain stories about Chud. Oral stories about the meeting of the first settlers with the native population are widespread in the Russian North. They presented a story about the struggle of the Novgorodians with the Chud and circulated in Pinega, Verkhneto-emsky, Konoshsky, Leshukonsky, Vilegodsky areas of the Arkhangelsk region [23, Drannikova N. V.]. The main motives of these legends (according to the classification of N.A. Krinichnaya) is the struggle with the antagonist, getting rid of him, disappearance of the character or a specific community in specific location [24]. The last motif in the folklore prose is often presented in the texts by the following elements: immersion (leave) in the ground, the mountain, source; self-burial; death. Legends like the ones in Patrakeevka with the motif of assimilation [23, Drannikova N.V.] or withdrawal (escape, retreat) from the area to other land are less common. E.g., the book by N. A. Krinichnaya has only texts about how Chud moves to the Novaya Zemlya [24]. In our case, Chud goes east, as it happened in two other texts from the collection of N.A. Krinichnaya [24]. In the legend recorded by priest A. Rozhin in Patrakeevka, the motive of assimilation of Chud is more colorful compare to the other publications [23, Drannikova N.V.; 24, Krinichnaya N.A.]. In this text, the natives begin “to hide their origin” after assimilation with the Russian population.

Most of the recorded stories are about hunting. The main theme of these stories is the production of a seal in times of the veshnyi put’ or a hunting company for young seals, held in March. It took place near the village of Zimnyaya Zolotitsa. The hunting started on Vlasev Day (11/24 of February) and ended in early March. Stories about hunting relate to the 1950s — 2000s, and end in 2007 when the state prohibited the seal hunt. These stories contain so many ethnographic details. They include historical information, e.g., that in the early days, during the fishing season many hunters died, or the sea ice-blocks carried people away to the White Sea or special boat-sledges with the runners to move on the ice existed to transport dead seals, etc. In the Soviet time, trapping campaign was done on icebreakers. Respondents gave a detail description of the seal cultivation. The gender of the respondent influenced the style of the stories. The female per- ception of hunting is full of sympathy for the seals. A woman-respondent told about baby seals as about children: they beat kids with hooks; she called trapping the meat grinder and the cages for seal pups — the concentration camp for animals. The accuracy of the narratives is given by the manes of the place: the stories mentioned Zemnegoisky and Veprevsky beacons, located near the village Zimnyaya Zolotitsa. Narrators positively evaluate the changes in the life of the hunters that have occurred in the Soviet period. They consider them more comfortable compared to the presoviet times. The cognitive context of these stories is filled with tragedy. It is associated with extreme natural conditions for the trapping and hunt. Their extremity is passed through the gradations of episodes included in the text of the story: the ice will break away from the fast ice; the icehole is full of shuga12; sometimes there were several kilometers of the broken away ice13. The respondents agree upon the great role played by hunting in the life of Pomors, but their stories about it imposed the Soviet context that manifest its importance for the country. Importance of hunt for our respondents reinforces their knowledge of the historical facts. During the Great Patriotic War, the residents of Arkhangelsk survived because of the seal meat. Some of the stories about hunting represent hypertext formations — they include toponymic legends about the origin of the name of the village Zolotitsa, which thou would have occurred from the gold fur14. (A.G. Kokorina, born 1938)

A part of the local identity of the Patrakeevka is a good knowledge of the local fishing calendar. Because the fishing did not stop in the Soviet period, the calendar did not change. The residents of Patrakeevka know the dates of the different approaches/walks for salmon, whitefish and herring, timed to coincide with the calendar holidays. Each of those trips aimed at catching a certain type of fish: Ivanovo salmon campaign (June 24/July 7) for small salmon, or tinda; Petrovsky campaign (June 29/July 12) — black-spined herring; Ilinsky campaign (July 20/August 2) — Il’inka (Atlantic salmon), black-spined herring; Transfiguration (August 6/19) and Assumption campaigns (August 15/28) — black-spined herring, Alexander Nevsky campaign (August 30/September 12) — black-spined herring, Semenov day campaign (September 1/14) — pokrovka, or freshwater whitefish; the Displacement (September14/27) and the Cover campaigns (October 1/14) — pokrovka or freshwater whitefish; the Kazan icon of the Mother of God salmon campaign (October 22/November 4) until November — small Atlantic salmon. The last salmon was called pioneer or “zaledka” (means “behind the ice”). Whitefish was caught on the Ilin day (July 20/August 2), herring — since the Cover day (1/14 October) and until the Candlemas (Feb 2/15). The fishing cam- paigns confined to the holidays of Christmas and Epiphany. Fishing of pike depended on the phases of the moon. It was believed that pike was caught especially well on the waning moon. Agricultural calendar compared to the fishing calendar is lost. It was not functional for the local community. In addition to the fishing campaigns, the calendar holidays in Patrakeevka were the navigation of vessels to Norway. The boats departed from Arkhangelsk to Norway between the Spirits Day and the Semenov Day (September 1/14). They returned to Patrakeevka by the Cover day. “On the Spirits Day, our sailors believed, that the wind would be from the mountain, it is East or SouthEast, to leave the White Sea and move to Norway. They left before the Semenov Day but came to Arkhangelsk, not here, it's shallow here”. (S.I. Burkov, born 1948)

The ethno-cultural traditions of Patrakeevka has ritualistic behavioral norms belonging to the ritual and mythological knowledge. A high degree of safety of behavioral standards is due to the nature of this activity: “a person here, more than in any other sector of the economy, feels at the mercy of natural forces, and sometimes he is directly aware of his helplessness” [25, Tokarev S.A., p. 231]. One of the most respected festivals in the Patrakeevka is The Annunciation. In old days, there were ritual prohibitions to the work this day: “ Ships at sea do not go out on , the same is on Monday, the same, not to be out in the sea ”. (V. N. Zamyatin, born 1937). The respondent noted that the prohibition had a higher obligatoriness than bans on other religious holidays, and compared the need for compliance with a law: “Nobody starts any work, do not start. It is as a law”. (V.N. Zamyatin, born 1937). The Annunciation in Patrakeevka, as in the Koida village of the Mezensky district (FA NArFU, p. 605), was more important than Easter. This might indicate the impact of old believers who had the same attitude to these holidays [3, Bernshtam T.A.]. The transformation of traditional consciousness in the Soviet period is clearly visible in the responses to the questions regarding the content of the prohibitions on fisheries for the other holidays — that is why the researcher and the respondent started to put the different cultural meanings in the traditional mixture for the local community vocabulary. Our question about a prohibition to fish on the Ilin Day (July 20/August 2) was not understood by the respondent. Therefore, he answered within the logic of the current discourse associated with the official ban on fishing: “ No, before there were no prohibitions, there are various prohibition right now, and before that, fish any time you want, how much you want and the longer the better ”. (V.N. Zamyatin, born 1937)

The traditional culture of Patrakeevka had a belief in different objects-amulets well known to our respondents. It was believed that to access the sea successfully, it was mandatory to have an icon, mostly with the image of St. Nicholas. Local population honored him as the patron of sail- ors and anglers. Sometimes the icon had the image of angler’s saint patron. In addition, a talisman could be a rag doll made by female family members. It was believed that the doll would bring the luck of the “spirit of the house” (J.D. Zamyatin, born 1942).

Phenological observations remain functional for the local community. They are preserved as signs and beliefs. The population of Patrakeevka, as well as the other villages of the Winter Coast, divided favorable and unfavorable winds for crafts. A North-West wind or “poberegnik” (“coastal wind”) was the most favorable for fishing: “ And so it is usually called autolec — when it was blowing West or North-West, rinsed for three or four days, then turned to the mountain, and the Mountain is the North wind or the North-East, that’s why it is called “autolec”. Then put nets on the salmon and manage. The water is muddy — the fish cannot see anything, rushing like a tank to the nets. Men call it “autolec”, that means a will that is given to you ” (S. I. Burkov, born 1948). The non-favorable winds are Southwest, Southeast and East winds. Such an attitude is in proverbs, common for this area: “ If the wind is west — fish stop. The fish are not biting ” (V.M. Firsov, born 1950); “ The East won’t put into a cup but takes out. The rottenest winds are East and Southeast winds to the Sykhoe More, because the water squeezes too much .” (S.I. Burkov, born 1948) “ If it is blowing east then from the spoon: people ate their reserves, and the fish was not caught” . (J. D. Zamyatin, born 1942). Explanations of the negative effects of eastern winds on the fish catch reveal gender difference: the men explanation relates to the nature and climate, women’s — to the household.

The widespread superstition about a large crop of mountain ash and the rain weather received fishing rethinking: “When there is a lot of green ash fruits on the trees, there will be a salmon” — people told” (S. I. Burkov, born 1948). Despite the widespread use of phenological observations in local folk-speech discourse in recent decades due to climatic changes, the respondents aged less than 60–70 years note their senility and understatement: “ These are the old omens. Now many of them do not match...Yes, it was something about the case. Now, it should be so, but it is rather different. Many omens do not match” (V.M. Firsov, born 1950). Some of the respondents, who are not involved in fishing, can hardly remember them.

In Soviet times, the farewell to the hunting of seals was lost. The question about how the farewell was performed was answered that there were no farewell, because “they left not for a holiday but to kill the mammals”. Modern ritual practices include the Fisherman's Day, celebrated instead of the traditional St. Peter and Paul Day on the July 12. Previously, he was a common holiday held in the central village of the Patrakeevka parish — The Patrakeevka village. The Fisherman's Day was a Soviet professional holiday. It brought all the residents of the fishing collective together. Now, on this day, a common meal from the salmon or pink salmon is cooked for the members of the collective. A cultural program accompanies the feast. People recall famous fellow villagers and organize games for children and adults. The games symbolically manifest the identity of the local community. Some of them resemble fishing, which, until recently, has been the main activity. The children's game “fishermen and fish” has a competition between its participants in the number of “caught” fish to get the status of the winner in the eyes of the local community.

The factors that support and enhance the local identity are the presence of prominent or famous villagers among the local community members. The residents of Patrakeevka are proud of Ivan Ryabov (I.E. Sedunov) who repeated the feat of Ivan Susanin. During the Northern war, in 1701, the Swedes captured him and demanded to show the pass to capture the Novodvinsk fortress. Ryabov I. put two Swedish ships ashore under the walls of the fortress. The ships were destroyed. One more famous resident of Patrakeevka is the shipowner N.I. Kopytov. He bought in England the first metal trawler in the Arkhangelsk province. In 1856, during the expedition to the North, the writer S. V. Maksimov visited his ship [26, Maksimov S.V.]. The least known man among the resident of Patrakeevka is a shipbuilder and ship owner I.I. Burkov (1861–1938). He had his own shipping company to compete with “the Arkhangelsk-Murmansk Express Steamship Company”. Burkov I.I. was shot in 1938 because of the case of the Norwegian Consulate in Arkhangelsk. Some more famous people from this village: the ship-owner G. I. Burkov who had seven sailing vessels, like I.I. Burkov shot in 1938; a member of the V.A. Rusanov’s missing Arctic expedition 1912, a sailor of the ship “Hercules” — A.S. Chukhchin; captain of the icebreaker “Sadko” made a significant contribution to the development of the Arctic and the Northern Sea Route — V.N. Burkov, and the captain of the first soviet research vessel “Persey” P.I. Burkov; head of the collective “Krasnoe Znamya” and the Chairman of the Union of fishing collectives of the Arkhangelsk region — L.M. Selyaninov.

Conclusion

Let us sum up the results. The study leads to the conclusion that ethno-cultural tradition of the Patrakeevka village is a local type of Pomor culture. Patrakeevka is the center of cultural micro areas which includes the villages of Kuya, Kozli, Kad’, Poborka, Lod'ma and Izhma. The villagers have a positive identity. They are proud to tell about the historical past of their village and know it well. They are also proud of their ancestors – residents of Novgorod, the fact that they had no serfdom and their village was founded before the town of Arkhangelsk. The villagers are also proud of the fact that they had more fishing and trade ships than Arkhangelsk, had their own saltworks, the first schools in the province, being a center for the education of sailors, higher cultural level of its residents and being richer than the other Pomor villagers. The Patrakeevka residents believe their ancestors were freedom-loving, brave and enterprising people. The same features they see in themselves and their micro group. They are proud of their fellow villagers — the captains and ship-owners, chairpersons of the local fishing collectives of the Soviet period.

In the minds of the locals, there are several levels of opposition to the others. Historically they oppose themselves to Moscow, Chud and Nenets; currently — to the villages, located far from the sea, and to a lesser extent, to the Pomor villages that are far from Patrakeevka in neighboring Mezensky district of the Arkhangelsk region. An important part of the local identity of the Patrakeevka villagers is a representation of their cultural proximity to the residents of the Arkhangelsk and its old part — Solombala, and a knowledge of the fishing traditions and phenological observations available in the form of signs and beliefs.