Pomorie and Pomors: the structure of one historical myth

ural processes in the Russian North is becoming emerged in the early 90s of the twentieth cen--‐ tury during the collapse of the Soviet Union. Its purpose is in the first stage cross--‐border regionali--‐ zation of the Russian North, the transformation of Pomorye (Barents region) with the creation of the titular ethnic group under it "Pomorie" as a people "non--‐Russian" by definition. The project has gone through several stages: the formation of the ethnic myth and organizational. Now, under the sign of the requirements of the official recognition of "indigenous people" is its politicization. Worked out on the basis of non--‐Russian ethnic mythological image "Pomorie" adepts Pomors ide--‐ as have already begun converting living in the northern region of the Russian Federation of the local Russian population. September 17, 2011 in Arkhangelsk, the IV Congress of the Inter--‐regional coast--‐dwellers. It was attended by about 400 delegates. In June of that year, when the newly formed Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov, especially for the eth--‐ nic studies "Pomorye", was created by the Research Center "Pomors Institute of Indigenous Peo--‐ ple of the North." Leader of the movement in Arkhangelsk --‐ Moseyev became its director. A year before, in November 2010, at the meeting of the Governor of the Arkhangelsk region, I.F. Mikhal--‐ chuk with the activists of the Pomers NGOs agreed on the cooperation in the framework of the so--‐ called a «Pomors vector" for the region. Since then, in the official speeches of the Arkhangelsk Governor --‐ I.F. Mikhalchuk became possible the notes of Pomors ethnic myth. Some provisions of the Pomors historical ideas began to appear in various documents of the regional administration. All of this is a clear "achievement" of twenty years' development of the Pomors ethnic separatism in the Russian North.

In the research of the Pomors ethno genesis in Arkhangelsk should note its main feature --‐ the creation in Russia of a new ethnic identity is masked by the "national revival" allegedly existed in the past, the ethnic group "Pomorie". In this respect, the process resembles a Slavic "awaken--‐ ing" in the region of Central and Eastern Europe in the first half of the nineteenth century and, es--‐ pecially, its successful "Ukrainian project." By analogy with this phenomenon, we note that at the first stage of the "Pomors revival" has played a vital role in Arkhangelsk purposeful work of the lo--‐ cal intelligentsia to create Pomors historical and cultural myths.

As an integral kind Pomors historical myth contained in the five--‐volume monograph by N. Bulatov (1946--‐2007) "Russian North", which appeared in book form in 1997--‐2002. [1] This text was partially reduced by the author in a textbook for high school and under the same title published in 2006. [2] Edition, addressed local student youth, the textbook was funded by the federal program "Culture of Russia". Foreign aspect Pomeranian historical concept is presented in a special edition of the school for high school, dedicated to the Norwegian "Barents Region" [3]. A key provision of the Pomors historical myth was repeated V. Bulatov in 2005 in the "science help", prepared them for the figures «Pomors revival." Aforesaid documents presented "Pomorie" in Arkhangelsk Oblast Administration, is proof that the original "scientific research" on Pomors topics were political.

The main clause of the Pomors historical myth lies in the historical geography of the Rus--‐ sian North. The main role is played by the idea that "in the XV--‐XVII centuries of the Pomorye called comprehensive economic and administrative district on the banks of the White Sea, Lake Onega and the rivers Onega, Severnaya Dvina, Mezen Pinega, Pechora, Kama and Vyatka up to the Urals». And, secondly, that this vast territory was populated by self--‐respect to the non--‐Russian ethnic group (the people), "coast--‐dwellers".

Ethnogenesis "Pomorie" by V. Bulatov, was due to the fusion of cultures "protopomorskih", mainly Finno--‐Ugric (Peipus) tribes White Sea and the first Slavic colonists (even non--‐Russian --‐ sic ), Actively populated territory Zavolochye Peipsi. The concept of "protopomorov" within the mean--‐ ing is close to the ideas of Estonian archaeologist Preity League and Finnish researcher Christian Carpelan, who argued that the modern population of the territories of the Russian North in the Middle Ages changed their ethnic identity in the absence of significant migration of the Russian population and the physical changes of the local Finno--‐Ugric population [4, with. 37--‐41]. Pseudo--‐ concept is therefore based on a particular interpretation of the colonization process of the Russian North and specific interpretation of local historical and geographical and local concepts.

In his writings, V. Bulatov defines ethnicity of "Pomorie" as a nation consisting of several language groups. For example, "the Russian--‐speaking ethnic group inhabits pomors colonized the banks of the White Sea XII century" [3, p. 25, 2, p. 111] "The specifics of life in the North and formed a special type of people, including ethnic group --‐ Pomorie, settled in the White and Bar--‐ ents Seas" [5, p. 9]. In ethnos "Pomorie" could exist different language groups, including Finno--‐ Ugric. Since 2008, the Norwegians in line with the concept began to advertise in Russia "Native Barents Region" --‐ "Norwegian coast--‐dwellers" 1.

Assertion about the existence of "Pomorie" of different language groups, among others, al--‐ lows not only to bind Pomors Finno--‐Ugric, but to udrevlyat imaginary phenomenon in the marine ethnogenesis. Here, however, V. Bulatov's no clear answer about his initial time point. In a special article he edited the "Pomors Encyclopedia", where it says: "Pomors – is a Russian--‐speaking ethnic group that settled in (with the XII century) and the White Barentseva seas" [6, p. 317]. On the twelfth century V. Bulatov pointed in his other works [7] In particular, there is absolutely fantastic, he says: "In the Novgorod maps XII--‐XIII centuries, at the mouth of the Onega has been designated" pogost in the sea2. A little later, in 2006, he spent several udrevnil phenomenon: "The name" Pomorie "comes within the tenth to twelfth centuries" 3.

In this regard, we recall that "Pomors" and "Sea Coast Dwellers" was first mentioned in thw historical sources in the Novgorod chronicles one year in 1526, and acts --‐ by the year 1546. The assertion of the existence of the ethnic group "Pomorie" ethnonym and appropriate to the X--‐ XII centuries, therefore, is purely speculative, since they have not specifically confirmed by histori--‐ cal sources.

Note, that all earlier reports of Pomors in the first half and middle of the sixteenth century belong to the coastal end of the White Sea, which bears the name of the Middle Ages the Pomors coast. It is first mentioned in Pomorie one true Novgorod literacy middle of the fifteenth century --‐ the deed of a Menueva son Ivan. Therefore, it is logical to assume that the first under the "Po--‐ mortsev" in the sixteenth century, it was understood not special people (ethnos), and a local group of people, got its name from a particular location on the coast of the White Sea. Preserved a complex of Novgorodians lettersm which definitely shows that the Slavic colonization of the Po--‐ mors of the White Sea coast began not earlier, than in the fourteenth century 4. In particular, tried to look at the problem M.V. Vitov, historian and ethnographer T.M. Bernshtam. [8] About the time of the Slavic colonization of this part of the White Sea, and definitely shows a relatively late arrival of these parishes. To a later period than the twelfth century, are now generally colonization of the Russian North and archaeologist Nikolai Makarov [9, p. 163]. Conclusions of these scientists V. Bu--‐ latov in his writings completely neglected, and ignoring the fact that just on the shore of the White Sea Popers Chud ("protopomory" in his terminology) had never lived. Originally it was the territory of Lop (Sami) [10, p. 71]. The first wave of settlers was here in the fourteenth century the Karelians and then Russian [11, p. 28--‐29]. Thus, the ethnic group of historical and not mythical Pomors arose on the basis of ethnic contact three nations: Russian, Karelians and Lapps.

Next, a historian from Arkhangelsk says that the ethnonym "Pomorie", after there was no later than the tenth to twelfth centuries, the Pomeranian coast of the White Sea, in the XIV--‐XVI centuries, the spread nilsya far south and east from the place of its origin. However, the fact of a mass migration from the area at the appointed period is not confirmed by any sources. However V. Bulatov says that throughout the present territory of the Russian North have settled in the fif--‐ teenth century ethnicity "Pomorie". To support this thesis Arkhangelsk historian in his texts just starts confusing the issue. For example, in V. Bulatov says: "In 1419, five hundred" Murman ", ap--‐ pearing on ships --‐ the necklace and augers, --‐" make war "Korelsky churchyard in Varzuga, de--‐ stroyed villages and onezhan dvinyan. However, the Norwegians got rebuff: Pomorie "two screws Moorman izbisha '" [2, p. 120]. In the original text as the First Novgorod Chronicle younger recen--‐ sion reads: "In the same year, he came and Murman Warrior chelovek 500 Bb, Bb in the necklace and the auger, and povoevasha Bb Arzugi pogost Korilskyi and land Zavolochkoi cemeteries: in Ne--‐ noksa in Korelskom Manastir St. Nicholas, Konechnyi pogost Yakovlev kyuryu, Ondreyanov bereg, Kii ostrov, Kyar ostrov, Mihailov Manastir, Chiglonim, Hechinima 3 churches burned and Hristian chernorizits flogged and zavolochane two screws Murman izbisha and inii izbegosha at sea. " As you can see, the primary source there is no "settlements onezhan" and Norwegians actually de--‐ stroy zavolochane, ie residents of Novgorod Zavolochye parish, another name --‐ "dvinyane" and are not "coast--‐dwellers." So, in his writings, V. Bulatov claims that in XV--‐XVI centuries, the entire mod--‐ ern Riya territory of the Russian North, that is, land lying in the river basins of the Northern Dvina, Sukhona, Onega, Mezen, Pechora, Kama and Vyatka, wore name "Pomorie" [2, p. 3]. But at the moment there is no special historical and geographical research on the existence of the Russian North in time the concept of "Pomorie". Try to partially fill this gap.

In the study of complex texts of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries is not difficult to see that the sources of the historic reference to the Russian North, there are two different things, "Pomorie", with different scope. One of them can be described as "small" Pomorie, the other --‐ the "big". "Small" Pomorie, as we pointed out above, was first mentioned in sources from the middle of the fifteenth century. Its kernel is the Pomeranian coast of the White Sea. For residents, the beach, otherwise known as early as the sources of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries «Pomorie ", at their residence became known as "Pomors." This "small" Pomorie became the nu--‐ cleus of the so--‐called a "Pomorie counties." "Pomor parish" (option --‐ «Pomorie Region") with sul--‐ fur--‐Dina sixteenth to the end of the seventeenth century was a separate administrative district, Managing Solovetsky monastery5. Later, in the nineteenth century, this Kem County Arkhan--‐ gelogorodskaya province. With the development of the middle of the sixteenth century, Mur--‐ mansk fisheries in Kola, which is precisely the population of participants Vova Pomeranian coast, the term "small" applies to Pomerania proto--‐zhennuyu coastline of the Kola Peninsula. As such, it is recorded in Pomerania "Receipt Pomeranian rivers" "Great Books drawing" beginning of the seventeenth century. All existing historical sources XVI century speak of a "small" Pomorie and do not confirm the thesis of the existence of this period of "big" Pomerania, which stretches from the White Sea in the west and Beloozero to the Urals in the east. What is in this case the source of al--‐ legations of the existence of the whole administrative region of Pomerania in the XVI century? As it turns out, modern--‐tion scientific tradition that dates to the origins of creativity Tatischev and based on the works of the great Russian historian, Academician SF Platonov. SF Platonov, studying Troubles early XVII century, drew attention to the fact that, in political terms, it was a war be--‐ tween the north and south of Muscovy, in which the different areas (groups of counties) held a strong position. SF Platonov noted that the position of the population in the war and the military servicemen corporate functions of individual counties was directly related to the fact whether the--‐ se consist of administrative units in the prior period oprichnina or not. Thus was born the "region--‐ al" concept Troubles SF Platonov [12]. For her, the Russian historian has used political and geo--‐ graphical, terminology of the documents from the Troubles and dumped her in time to the middle of the XVI century, the era of oprichnina Ivan the Terrible. Along the way, so SF Platonov and cre--‐ ated another's original concept oprichnina.

Thus, the concept of the "big" Pomorye found in the historical sources and not from the XVI, especially not with the XV century, and only the beginning of the seventeenth century 6. There it was originally in the text as mutually related to each other concept: "Pomor town" (option "Pomors Suburbs") --‐ "Pomors people" 7. Consolidation in the modern scientific tradition use of the term "large" Pomors applied to the whole territory of the Russian North after SF Platonov particu--‐ larly promoted the fundamental work of Academician M. Theology "Zemsky government in the Russian North in the XVII Century," containing his--‐ rico--‐geography [13, p. 9--‐28]. Reported works SF Platonov and MM slovskogo God--‐created strong tradition in the naming of national historiography of the twentieth century, all of the Russian North Pomorye. Russian historians have used the con--‐ cept of regional "big" Pomorye without a second thought as a convenient abstraction of science to build their historical patterns. Using the concept of the "big" in the twentieth century Pomerania in Soviet historiography is determined more by personal tastes and biases of historians. Trace a pattern here is impossible. For example, NE Nosov in one of his monumental work, it is not used, and in the other, on the contrary, is often used [14]. During perestroika in the late 80's --‐ early 90--‐ ies of XX century intellectuals in Arkhangelsk took historiographical tradition of scientific concept of the "big" Pomerania and made it to the needs of the geographical reality of the political move--‐ ment of the local area defenders and the Regions under the slogan of "restoring the republic Pom--‐ eranian ". Through the work of the media in a short time, the concept of «Pomorie» and «Arkhan--‐ gelsk» has become synonymous.

Whether the concept of " Pomors city", "Pomors people" in the seventeenth century by the official sources in terms of their use in terms of administrative Russia at that time? Here we defi--‐ nitely say no. Officially, the entire country was then divided into districts under the jurisdiction of the metropolitan quarters. Place in this structure "big" Pomorie was not. No mention of "large" Pomorie any scribe or in the census books. But a special investigation of the sources of the XVII century can certainly say that the concept of "Pomeranian town" since the Troubles used in the proceedings of some (not all) of the Russian central agencies, such as the discharge. Troubles after it has been used (infrequently) and royal charters to places ukaznoy magistrates. Rather, the con--‐ cept of "on--‐sea town" appeared in the Time of Troubles in the capital's defense ministry in the be--‐ sieged men of Tushino Moscow 8. The assembly is the first time the material is recorded under the year 1609. His appearance, therefore, due to the military needs of the regional administration in the internal "civil war" beginning of the seventeenth century. Concept appeared on the needs aris--‐ ing in Russia regional policy. After the provincial administrative reforms of Peter I, the term «Po--‐ mors towns» disappears in the proceedings of the central authorities. But from mandative docu--‐ mentation seventeenth century concept of "large" Pomorie penetrated through creativity Tatischev (1685--‐1750) in the emerging Russian historical and geographical science, which then ac--‐ quired its own independent book destiny. [15] Casus is here that modern attempts to identify the Norwegians Pomors with BEAR consonant finds an analogy in Tatischev his identity Pomerania and legendary country Biarmy.

By "Pomor cities" means not a city, which in the reality of the seventeenth century in the Russian north and almost was not, and territorial--‐administrative units --‐ counties 9. The documents XV--‐XVII centuries, the word "city" appears synonymous with "county." Together with the notion of "Pomors town" in the sources of the Troubles era comes the concept of "Pomors people". But it would be the height of folly to assume that by "Pomor people" credentials Troubles and the then government correspondence refers to a separate ethnic group "Pomorie". Take the numerous pe--‐ titions preserved letters XVII century, sent residents of northern counties Russian in Moscow or the local governor to the district center. None of them, they do not call themselves "Pomorie". And if there is not a single document XVII century, from which would follow that the people of the Dvina, Kevrolskogo, Vazhsky and other counties (there are 22), consider and define themselves

"Pomorie", and furthermore there is no evidence "Pomeranian" ethnic identity they have, how can you say that at this time in North region of Russia there were a separate ethnic group by the eth--‐ nonym "Pomorie"? Residents of northern counties themselves counties "Pomorye" in the seven--‐ teenth and eighteenth century, and did not call themselves "help--‐set" did not and never called. It should be called the only exception in this series northern districts --‐ are residents of the so--‐called "Pomors townships" Solovetsky Monastery. Here they are in themselves and their documents XVI--‐ XVII century "Pomortsev" and "Sea Coast Dwellers" name. But whether they were at that time separate ethnic group, have non--‐Russian ethnic identity? Would be more correct to say that by "Pomortsev" then implied a local group of the population --‐ and Russian Karelians, which got its name from the toponym.

However, completely ignoring the historical sources, V. Bulatov in their discussions about the "big" and Pomorie "Pomorie" in the XVI century, in his textbook comes to the statement: "There were almost all signs of the nation: a common territory with access to sea (Pomerania), a common economic life Pomeranian counties, townships and cities, special traits, psychological and spiritual aspect of Pomorie originality of northern culture. Formed severorussky language of which there were local dialects and dialects, which have become the subject of a thorough study of phi--‐ lology, dialectology and ethnology "[2, p. 5] 10. Only the aggressive and repressive policies of Mos--‐ cow in XV--‐XVI centuries prevented folding "fourth in the Eastern Slavic nations --‐ severorossov."

So, what is the falsification of the history of the Russian North? "Small" in Pomorye concept is only mentioned as an area of imaginary ethnogenesis "Pomorie" in the tenth to twelfth centu--‐ ries. Further, this geographic reality of XVI--‐XIX centuries is completely ignored. "Small" Pomorie is mixed with a "large", is replaced by the latter. In this construction, the entire territory of the prov--‐ ince Arkhangelogorodskaya nineteenth century, the so--‐called "Russian North" are supposedly real--‐ ly existing in the region's past "Pomorie". After that it is "great" Pomorie immersed as deeply as possible in time. This mythical Pomorie XIV--‐XVI century’s anti--‐supplied Muscovy, and its popula--‐ tion, referred to as "Pomorie" --‐ all other Russian. Mythical "Pomorie" allegedly took the Finno--‐ Ugric "blood," his own "Slavic" language and their ethnic "Pomors culture." Moreover, in the his--‐ torical past, they were allegedly hostile to Russian. "Despite the active assimilation Pomorie Great Russian ethnos pomors retained their ethnic (national) identity to the present day", --‐ claimed V. Bulatov, bringing thus the ideological basis for the "on--‐sea revival"11.

Bordered historical myth of the "big" Pomorie allows Arkhangelsk regionals and etnosepa--‐ ratists in the creation of "Pomors republic" to present ", the historical claim" to the entire territory of the present Murmansk and Arkhangelsk regions and the part of Karelia. In the 1990s, they were able to introduce into the mass consciousness of the concept of northerners "Pomorie" as a syno--‐ nym for the Arkhangelsk region, make it geographic realities. Currently, regionalists and etnosepa--‐ ratists together with Norwegians are working on the definition of "Pomorye" and cross--‐border of "Barents Region" was equivalent.

The myth of the nation "Pomors" also makes available to the Archangel Etnoseparatists in the large potential human resource. After all, relatively speaking, the entire "old resident" popula--‐ tion Arkhangelogorodskaya province until 1917, according to the historical myth, declared it pos--‐ sible to "Pomorie". "Pomors revival" in practice means that now any offspring of these "old--‐ timers" may refuse to Russian ethnicity and declare themselves "Pomorie". It is no coincidence that the destructive etnokonfliktny and political potential Pomors historical myth, combined with the practice of «Pomors revival" has been appreciated abroad, and received the American and Norwegian support 12. From the base of the myth about the "big" Pomorie and people "Pomors", who inhabited it, in such case, it is created a whole series of other historical myths. Briefly enu--‐ merate them.

The myth about the great Pomors. Since the entire territory of the present Russian North, from the XII century was inhabited by Pomors, all local, somewhat famous figures of Russian histo--‐ ry and culture are not declared Russian and the ethnic "Pomorie". So Pomory were: St Stephen of Perm and St. Anthony of Siya, the conquerors of Siberia Yermak and brothers Stroganovs, explor--‐ ers and E. S. Dezhnev Khabarovsk, scientist Mikhail Lomonosov and sculptor F. Shubin, etc. [2, 125, 199, 245, 263, 276, 311, 312, 338, 532].

The historical myth of the "big" Pomorie and people "Pomors" who lives in it as part of a particular interpretation of the international relations at the local Arctic. Here it is necessary to take into account the fact that the Pomeranian concept was originally created was given a need generated by Norwegians in 1992 cross--‐border in the Barents Region. "Pomorie and Norwegians together mastered the Arctic seas, fish and mammals were pro--‐thought, the last two centuries to trade successfully." "Pomorie and Norwegians somehow participated in many expeditions, whose purpose was to study the Arctic", --‐ says Vladimir Bulatov in one of his works [3, p. 4, 44]. Thus, these are, in his interpretation, two in--‐kind --‐ Pomorie (not Russian) and Norwegians, mastered the

Arctic and build their relations on the basis of positive relationships. Here, the concept of Profes--‐ sor V. Bulatov harmony with the ideas of theoreticians Barents Norwegian scientists Olav Schram Stokke and Rune Kastberg, standing out in his periodization in his stories so--‐called "Pomeranian era" from the end of XVII century until 1917. [16] The history of this period served primarily as a conflict--‐free in the Norwegian--‐Russian relations, time, though in reality it was absolutely the con--‐ trary. [17] In connection with such events depicting facts of Russian--‐Norwegian relations, as duty--‐ free Russian barter trade in the Danish--‐Norwegian, Swedish--‐Norwegian Finnmark, excessively ex--‐ aggerated. Repeated here Norwegians invented the myth of the existence of in the Arctic region, the joint Russian--‐Norwegian language, the so--‐called russennorska [3, p. 35].

The myth about the absence of serfdom in Pomorie --‐ the historical center of "freedom" and "democracy" --‐ "large" Pomorie in the Middle Ages is a region with a different socio--‐economic rela--‐ tions, than the rest of Moscow. In particular, it is quite in demand repeated myth of the absence of serfdom in the Russian North. "The people of Pomerania never knew the Mongol--‐Tatar yoke and serfdom, and because of this they grew freedom--‐loving, adventurous, rich and educated peo--‐ ple" [18]. "In the XVII century in the 22 counties of Pomors bulk of the population were free of landowners and serfs" chernososhnye "Pomors peasants" [3, p. 34]. "In the Russian North has de--‐ veloped a peculiar type of the state feudalism, in which the most numerous segment of the popu--‐ lation --‐ the peasantry --‐ did not know of the serfs in its classical form," [2, c. 177]. In fact, serfdom --‐ it is not a "patrimonial regime" control the peasantry, ie landlords (manorial system came to serf--‐ dom), and special--‐purpose and general public restraint mode of movement for tax--‐paying popula--‐ tion serviceable collection of taxes to the treasury. The existence of serfdom in the Russian North in the seventeenth century shows a lot of documents, in particular, such a massive source as scribe and census books.

The reason for the particular socio--‐economic life in "Pomorye" were "republican" and "democratic" tradition, inherited from Veliky Novgorod. This thesis with particular insistence re--‐ peated several times [2, p. 58, 410, 417, 418]. These "democratic traditions" have been under--‐ mined by a deliberate policy of the Moscow district of the state. "The power of the governor was intended to satisfy the interests of the state at the expense of the democratic order established in the Russian North in past centuries" --‐ claimed V. Bulatov [2, p. 418]. "The population of Moscow began a policy of carrot and stick" [2, p. 117, 158]. Finally, with regard to freedom, democracy and the republic, in this case, Professor V. Bulatov repeats become conventional wisdom emerged in Russian historiography in the early XIX century, the liberal myth of ancient Novgorod the Great, composed back in the Masonic lodges of the early nineteenth century future Decembrists. Histori--‐ cal myth--‐making technology was here in the introduction of a specific historical context of modern innovations other European civilization. When scientific historical research in the examination re--‐ veals that the ancient Novgorod the Great was never a republic, and even less, democracy. Apolo--‐ gy ancient Novgorod as "correct historic choice" in favor of the West --‐ the usual publicity stunt in post--‐Soviet Russia and the Baltic countries, as well as the approval of winning Novgorod Muscovy with its "Asiatic", allegedly led Russia to despotism and ruin.

In this topic is significant only one topic – is the problem of movement of land ownership in the Russian North. "In Pomorye always prevailed black peasant land ... The position of independ--‐ ent Pomors counties gradually began to change after the rise of Moscow and the establishment of a centralized Russian state "[2, p. 4]. In fact, everything was absolutely the opposite. Black land ownership and related peasant parish established themselves in the Russian north after the en--‐ forced removal of the Grand Duke of Moscow Novgorod veche orders in 1478. Prior to that, in the Novgorod and Dvina lands dominated lordly estates --‐ boyar estates. [19] Its elimination and ap--‐ proval on its ruins a black peasant land became a fundamental revolution in the relations of land ownership --‐ a kind of "conservative" revolution from above. Against it the vast majority of the population of Novgorod just did not play. Moreover, it has accelerated the process of the coloniza--‐ tion of the Russian people of the North

In conclusion, I would like to mention one more fact. In the first half of the sixteenth centu--‐ ry on the Dvina in the peasant families, descended from local Novgorod svoezemtsy, that is, "Po--‐ mors» have patriarchal slavery, which was widely practiced. This was definitely showing some ex--‐ tant letters13. In this case, how to be with the spirit of Pomorye --‐ "freedom"? In this patriarchal slavery on the Dvina was common it is in the Novgorod period. In Moscow, it is obsolete.

Myth of the specific socio--‐economic conditions of "Pomorye" generates the sublime ethnic glorification of "Pomorie", typical of any pseudo nathinalism. In this respect, "Pomorie" become like Cossacks Ukrainian, as the separatist historical myth. "The spirit of liberty and solidarity, edu--‐ cation and freedom have long been vital in Pomorie. The harsh northern nature and huge territo--‐ rial space formed Pomeranian special national characteristics, determined the unusual way the Russian North. Living on the banks of the "icy" sea coast--‐dwellers made strong, courageous and hard--‐working ", --‐ claimed V. Bulatov [2, p. 3].»I have always admired our ancestors Pomors --‐ cou--‐ rageous and friendly, inquisitive and hard working ... Likhachev attribute: "Pomorie also gentility as pole--‐nobles'" [5, p. 7]. In mythology Pomor--‐sky ideas autochthonous ethnogenesis, exclusivity, cultural demiurgichnosti Pomors interpreted as the exclusive representative of the ethnic group Pomeranian --‐ "salt of the earth Pomorye." V. Bulatov wrote about Pomorie as people endowed with "enterprise," Pomeranian upryamkoy, "" intelligence, courage and independence, the ability to make decisions in difficult situations. » Note, however, that the true historical reality could far removed from the romantic ideal. In particular, V. Bulatov says in his book: "The inhabitants of the Russian North were one of the most educated part of the population of Russia, and in the first half of the XVI century, the European North of landowners were more than 80% literate people" [20]. How can I determine the number of literate population in the northern counties of Russian in the first half of the sixteenth century up to one per cent, remains a complete mystery to us. This is ab--‐ solutely fantastic speculation least because the number of population of the region at this time is determined purely retrospective, and therefore approximate. When we talk about the actual level of literacy of the population in the Russian North in the middle Ages, it is necessary to pay atten--‐ tion to the curious fact noted by folklorists and ethnographers in the late twentieth century. Epics of ancient cycles are recorded by storytellers --‐ people are generally illiterate or semi--‐literate [21, p. 10]. It turns out that factor in the preservation of the epic folklore in the North was widespread in the local community illiteracy. In the literate, educated person appear quite different cultural requirements and epics, he ceased to be interested, let alone learn them by heart, and oral play. So, first, the wealth of traditional culture of the Russian North is not necessarily linked to the level of "enlightenment." And, secondly, it is unreasonable is the connection of local religious traditions precisely psevdoetnicheskoy culture "Pomorie". Signs of ethnicity Pomorie are ... ethnic religious ideology (of old Pomeranian--‐Orthodox Church)14. A famous fact – is the spread of the split after the middle of the seventeenth century among the inhabitants of the so--‐called "Pomeranian town--‐ ships" Solovetsky Monastery. Located here is one of the main centers of the split in Russia --‐ Vygovskaya deserts. Schismatic monasteries were at the Summer White Sea, and in the Winter. But how can the community with the dissenters to call the church? After all, the concept of "be--‐ spopovtsy" just and the apparent lack of any church hierarchy this schismatic sense.

Sum up the results. A key principle of the Pomors project --‐ is a denial of community mem--‐ bers formed Pomeranian Russian spiritual and ethnic roots, contrasting Russian, history, church, literary language, and culture. In this respect "pomor idea" for a sample chosen practical model for construction of Ukrainians. The fact that the "non--‐Russian" is the essence of the project, indicating its adherents constructed in the late XX century to the ethnic group called "coast--‐dwellers". In the historical past, the term is never used in an ethnic sense, but only in the territorial or professional designation as a defined geographical area residents and people of sea fishing activities. Thus, at the level of terminology carried visible line that separates "Pomorie" from the rest of the Russian world. The project of the Pomors is at the heart of its historical and linguistic concept, religious figures and ethnic myths. Among them: "original ethnic differences Pomerania and Russian--‐ray", "secular oppression Pomeranian language and culture, forced assimilation of coast--‐dwellers", "co--‐ lonial oppression Russia Pomerania." Of these myths and develops pomor of ethnic identity. Tak--‐ ing this imaginary Finno--‐Ugric identity, calling it, like "Pomorie", the person, thus, agrees with all the principles of "Pomors ideas."

In pomors ideas are initially incorporated orientation to the West. The denial of a Russian character and orthodoxy as a higher value than the connection with Norway, in itself a rejection of the Russian world. Besides constantly emphasizes intimacy "Pomorie" and "Pomerania" to Nor--‐ way, its culture, politics and mentality.

Initially entered into the strategy of Norwegian Barents region, the Pomors project is fo--‐ cused on the "West" not only as an abstract idea, but as a quite specific competitor of Russia in the Arctic region --‐ Norway and the United States behind it. Pomors project, itself was largely the result of the impact is not disinterested in these countries. The danger of "Pomors Project" is that it is the ultimate expression of the interests of the regional elite demoralized, to link up with local organized crime. In these circumstances, the absence in Russia of the nation and a weak civil soci--‐ ety, chronic economic and social crisis in the long term actually threaten the integrity of the Rus--‐ sian ethnic group in the Russian North.