Continuity in Past and Present Subsistence Patterns of the Russian Far East

By Phillip Mendenhall
For Siberia: an introduction to the region
IMARES Program at the EUSP
St. Petersburg, Russia
3 April 2010

Introduction

The traditional life ways of the peoples of the Russian Far East (RFE) has undergone
several changes in its long history. Some of these transformations have been caused by drastic
mutations in the local and global environment; such as changing sea-levels of the last Glacial
Age or the Younger Dryas Period (Stanley: 1980: 663) which as a result, has modified the
available flora and fauna for use. Political changes of the present and most recent past have also
altered the way in which local peoples have maintained their livelihood. The historic Chukchi,
for example, migrated from western Chukotka to coastal areas in the 13th and 14th Centuries as a
response to the invasions of the nearby Yukagirs (Abryutina: 2007: 327). This migration to
coastal areas from the continental tundra forever changed the way in which these groups lived.
And in the 20th Century the forced collectivization of the Peoples of the Far North, again altered
the traditional life ways of these people (Kozlov: 2007: 105-109).

Yet despite the commotions of modern and past eras, many of the original practices used
for daily survival still exist. The remaining mega fauna in the Artic biome are still both used as a
hunting resource and in a domestic fashion. Seasonal hunting for whales and sea mammals for
uses such as; oil, fat, skins and ivory are also a remaining major source of food reserves and
trade items. The seven major indigenous peoples of Chukotka (the Yupiget, Chukchi, Evens,
Koryaks, Chuvans, Yukagirs and the Kereks) all share a link to the past in this way and that
manifests itself, not only in a conscious remembrance of the past in ritual and rite, but also in the
everyday practices of daily life. The focus of the following paper will briefly examine some of
these similarities that the modern indigenous peoples have with the more ancient peoples of the
Russian Far North as far as traditional practices are concerned.

The earlier periods of human history in the RFE have been a difficult question to address
for historians and archaeologists. The environment has always been a major player in the
logistics of field research. In addition, there are varying amounts of information from the past.
The acidic soils of the Taiga can eat away at most organic artifacts while the dry, cold air of the
tundra can keep almost anything in a deep-freeze preservation and the sea has slowly risen to
bury finds along the coast. While people were able to live in all of these areas the difference in
preservation can skew interpretation. And finally, the political view of these changes in relation
to the present have brought their own difficulties in the dissemination of information, but some
major inferences can still be assessed.

The Sea

One of the major similarities between ancient and past life ways is the relationship with
the sea. Even in cases where the presence of inter-continental resources were used in high
abundance the use of coastal resources was always considered as well. Traditionally, Artic diets
based on the sea have a high volume of fat and protein while sacrificing the availability of
needed carbohydrates (Kozlov: 2007: 103). As far back as the crossing into the Americas, the
use of sea mammals as a reliable source of nutrition in all seasons has never went unnoticed.
Some recent work by the Bering Strait Archaeological Expedition (BSAE) has shed some light
on the procurement of these resources by the Old Bering Sea culture. Assigned dates for the Old
Bering Sea culture (also referred to as Paleo-Eskimo) have been calibrated to AD 390 to AD 823
for several coastal sites (Gusev: 1999: 358). One of the first conclusions of Old Bearing Sea
culture sites by the BSAE was the fact that all the investigated sites were within 100m of the
shoreline, except one, the Un’olen’on site which was 200m inland due to a depositional
coastline. This by itself shows a strong affinity towards the sea for subsistence as well as travel.
The Yupiget, which are considered the oldest of the Chukotka groups mentioned above
(presumably since 5000 B.C) where one of the first recognized to use the hunting of sea
mammals as their primary source of traditional subsistence (Abryutina: 2007: 327). The Yupiget
were able to inhabit such areas from coastal northeast Asia to Greenland all by relying on
sources from the sea. In fact the Yupik culture is one of the most varied and resourceful in the
Artic zone. Over 100 animal and plant species are used within the ecological zone which can be
compared with an average of ten for a reindeer based economy (Kozlov: 2007: 103). The
osteological data from the site of Kaniskak confirms its reliance difference in subsistence from
its more terrestrial neighbors. Of the identified bones; 67 per cent were that of sea mammals
compared to 33 per cent of land mammals of which 15-20 per cent were birds (which in fact
preserves very poorly due to the thinness of the bone structure and this number may actually be
even higher) (Gusev: 1999: 366). Prolonged dependence on the sea can be measured by the
procurement of mollusks at a settlement (see discussion below) which were also quite high at
Kaniskak. From a single locale, 500 mollusk shells were recovered compared with only three
fish bones (another poorly preserving bone) (Gusev: 1999: 366).

The reliance on the sea was able to continue into the more crowded Current Era in part
by an unofficial peace treaty with the neighboring Chukchi in the 18th and 19th Centuries. The
Chukchi originally arrived into the coastal areas in the 13th and 14th centuries and were; “situated
near to the Yupiget settlements at a ‘distance of an arrow flight’ [from each other]” (Abryutina:
2007: 326). To allow a more dense population in the area to survive, the sea at least initially
must have had a high enough threshold to support the newcomers. Yet, as time went on the
resources of the area were not able to replenish fast enough, which leads to conflict. The arrival
can actually be seen in the changes in settlement patterns of housing structures along the sea
coast. The earliest housing structures had a horizon view angle of a complete 360˚ circle.
Housing structures at this time had no need for a defensive position such as against a cliff-face or
glacial terrace. However; “The settlements which appeared during the Chukchi expansion had a
more restricted view of - 180˚” (Gusev: 1999: 358).During the whaling season, when the need of
a commanding view was absolutely necessary settlements were exposed to attack and show signs
of it in the archaeological record. For both of the named “Paleo-Eskimo” and “Neo-Eskimo”
cultures, the settlements; “were placed along the coast at distances of 4-24km from each other,
[the] distance varied with the time period” (Gusev: 1999: 367). Those settlements that were
found to be before the Chukchi migration were much closer to the sea at a height just above the
storm surge level, those after, were at much higher and in more defensive altitudes such as on a
terrace. Yet, comprises finally had to be made and the Chukchi who were (and continue to be),
primarily reindeer herders eventually adapted to the Yupiget way of life to such an extent that
they were often grouped together by Russian administrative sources (Abryutina: 2007: 327).

What can be taken from this example is that change in subsistence patterns and the arrival
of newcomers in the historical record should not be overlooked in the relationship with the
present. Take the diet of reindeer herding groups and that it is significantly different than that of
sea mammal hunters (Kozlov: 2007: 103). In other words, a change in diet results in a change of
culture. When the Chukchi first arrived into the area they brought a new form of culture as well
as a new source of food. Naturally conflict resulted, but eventually (after a few centuries) the two
different groups were indistinguishable from one another and were able to live together.
 The maritime cultures of the past and present in this area can also show continuity by
their relative difference with neighboring cultures. Until the mid 1960’s the Okhotsk Culture was
considered by many researchers to be a seaside cousin of the contemporary culture in Hokkaido,
Japan starting from a few centuries before the current era and lasting until 1000 A.D. and
presumably being restricted to the Kurile Islands until the 17th Century (Befu: 1964: 2). But as
Harumi Befu explains; “it shows no affinities with the Ainu and Japanese cultures and has an
economy remarkably like that of the more distant Aleut and Eskimo…its cultural difference from
the inland-hunting Ainu [and others mentioned]…is exemplified particularly in its maritime
hunting economy…a transplanted Bering Sea group” (Befu: 1964: 2-3). Consider for example,
the materials in figure 3. This set of artifacts compares quite significantly with the artifacts in
figure 1 (see below). Both sets of harpoons have double sided hook features and some portray
similar artistic references. Common fish hooks, while comparable in size, are given little to none
decorative qualities such as the arrow points described above.

Art

However, the fact that both culture complexes both hunted by the sea and eventually
lived together is not enough to establish a viable continuity with the past. Another comparison is
needed and one such is the use of art. Traditional art among the people of the North often
involves animalism (Abryutina: 2007: 328 and Luquet 1930: 96) and it is manifested in the
decoration of practical (spears and spoons) and non-practical (necklaces and novelities) objects.
This form of “decorative art” often blends local ideology about the cosmos or the other world
with its relationship in acquiring resources (e.g. the hunt) (Berezkin: 2006: 1-2). The term
decorative art will be used here in this terminology as Reinach states; “a practical end…[with] a
magical operation [in that it] gives the author of the design a power over the original” (S.
Reinach as quoted in Luquet: 1930: 97). In other words, “regular” objects, which were functional
without being modified, were given additional “strength” or value when they were modified.
This is as far as the application of this term can reach in these circumstances since we have no
direct evidence of the ritual use of any object cited here. However, the artifacts shown in figures
1 and 2 are some examples of early decorative art and some additional rare cases of figurative
art, or art on non-practical use items such as pendants. The figures below can be compared with
modern examples (see below).

Figure 1 gives us several examples of stylized harpoon spears, a harpoon stabilizer, a

full-figure pendant and a possible pendant of a face in plan with snow goggles. Interpretations
about such the meaning of such art forms will surely involve speculation. The first and second
rows of harpoon points reveal no immeadeate references to animalism, but this can only be seen
as an interpretation of style. It may be possible that there is a more abstract motif at work here
than can be seen. Artifact number 1, for example, when seen in profile could possibly represent a
whale with its mouth open to the bottom of the page. And the harpoon stabilizer (number 12)
could be interpreted as the swirling motions of the sea. Artifact number 9 can naturally be linked
with the common Venus figurine that has been present across Asia and Europe since the Early
Paleolithic Age. Thus, regardless of the actual interpretation, two premises can be given about
the work in general. The first is that the author of the work cared about the work being done
despite its limited practical use. Harpoon throwing is a dangerous endeavor and the items under
discussion, while tethered, still can be lost or broken in the hunt. So, the item (and the activity)
was of such importance that a special care was rendered to the key object in the event despite the
risk of the object and the time spent in decoration being easily lost. As a counter example
common arrows and darts, while also vital in terrestrial hunting are rarely given such a
decoration, even though most of them can be used again if recovered. The second premise is the
lack of the modern concept of art, or art for arts sake in the found objects. Today something can
be seen as art simply by removing it from its original environment and designating it as such (a
few pieces of rubbish in a gallery for example). Art in this venue did not exist in the context that
is being described here. Simply put, an object was decorated for a reason; to enhance its esthetic
value or to ascribe a special force to it.

The modern art pieces depicted in figure 5 maintain some links with the past as well as
some key differences. These items were obtained in trade with Chukchi artisans by Herbert
Aldrich, a local journalist-photographer who was a passenger on a New Bedford whaleship in
1887-89 and by whaling Captain Albert C. Sherman and his family in 1885-97 (Frank, Stuart
New Bedford Whaling Museum, personal correspondence 24 March 2010). Item (c) can be seen
as a modern representation of decorative art as defined by Luquet. The blade and sheath are fully
functional and it is possible for the author to use the item in a practical sense without doing harm
to the object. It is highly unlikely that item will retain much, if any; spiritualistic value and it
may have been produced solely for the use of trade. Item (b) is also made of ivory but it is not
decorated. This item was probably used in everyday life or enough that a decoration on the item
would be a waste of time. This item helps to show that a division was still being drawn between
everyday items and those of special or ritualistic intent. Specimens such as item (a) represent a
unique application to the use of art in northern societies. The image on the item is a traditional
depiction of life in Chukotka which at first glance appears to be a link with the past. Yet on the
contrary, depictions such as these were not depicted on non functional items such as an unaltered
walrus tusk. This item should be seen as a scene on a canvas rather than a decorative item and
this form of work probably appeared in the latter 19th and early 20th centuries. In 1931 the
residents of Uelen, for example, were the first to open a formal “workshop” for the development
of indigenous art and in the mid-1930’s a Russian artist named Alexander Gorbunkov
encouraged further growth in art for art’s sake (Bronshtein: 2007: 83). While this program did
allow for the continuation of the trade in a very difficult time, it did change the main purpose of
the idea away from religion to the concept being seen as a craft. Finally a return to more
traditional styles occurred towards the end of the 1980’s. The State Museum of Oriental Art in
Moscow resumed excavations near Uelen and rediscovered several pieces of prehistoric work.
Bronshtein writes; “at the end of every field season, [the archaeologists] visited the Uelen
workshop and showed their findings. [Bronshtein] was lucky to witness Uelen artists holding
Old Bering Sea harpoon heads and ‘winged objects’ [harpoon stabilizers] as they carefully
studied their design and background with the masterful skills of their makers” (Bronshtein: 2007:
96), a continuation indeed.

The Land and the Sea

It is often assumed that a group of people (especially concerning an indigenous people)

are able utilize all available resources within their range of influence. Images can easily be
conjured up of a wandering band that tracks herds of deer throughout the cold months and then,
when the weather is warmer, settling down by the sea to take advantage of fully grown mollusks
or another sea resource. The trouble is that this is not often the case as most wandering peoples,
while free to move about the environment, are restricted by the artificial barriers of an adjacent
society such as another’s hunting territory for example. Abryutina tells us that the Chukchi lived
as nomadic hunters in the tundra of western Siberia until the 13th to 14th Centuries (Abryutina:
2007: 327). As mentioned before, due to pressures brought on by the Yukagirs the Chukchi
moved along the approaching coast close to the Yupiget. The Chukchi, being traditional
reindeersmen, were faced with a new locality in which they had to survive in. What is naturally
assumed is that the approaching reindeersmen would try to utilize both what they knew (hunting)
and what would eventually be a supplement to their survival (sea hunting and fishing). However
what actually happened was an actual split in the population. Abryutina writes; “Some Chukchi
were sea hunters, while others partially hunted wild reindeers and developed reindeer breeding
on the tundra” and “the Chukchi population gradually increased and their tribes were divided in
to two groups: nomadic reindeer hunters and settled sea hunters” (Abryutina: 2007: 327). Not
everyone in the new area could maintain a single resource extraction since just one can consume
the majority of time, some people needed to take advantage of the newer sea mammal hunting
region that was made available to them separately. A similar case in prehistory can highlight the
needed change.

In the United State’s State of Maine, David Sanger hypothesized a pre-contact, year-
round coastal settlement or a pattern that meant separate coastal and interior populations (Sanger:
1996: 514). The year-round coastal hypothesis is supported by the focus on the soft-shell Mya
arenaria, a type mollusk that is only available in winter. Sanger writes: “the most prominent
mollusk in the shell middens is the soft-shell clam, which initiates rapid growth in April or May,
following a 'non-growth' or arrest phase that begins in November. Most of the mollusks were
gathered in the cold water season - November to May” (e.g. the time when it wasn’t desirable to
be near the sea) (Sanger: 1996: 517). Usually, it is thought, that marine resources are best
collected in the summer when weather conditions make the species more obtainable, yet this type
of mollusk was extracted from the sea at a time when they (the historical Red-Paint people of
coastal Maine) were thought to be further inland hunting deer. The mistake actually derives from
the early seasonal sailing patterns of European trading ships that skirted the Maine coast before
turning eastward to Europe (Sanger: 1996: 514). During the winter months, inland trading was
done with local tribes for furs and then the trading posts were left vacant during the summer.
And in the warm season ships were sailing home, noticing the “movement” of the alleged same
peoples to the sea. Eventually, the mistake was noted by those in contact, but the popular concept
of seasonal migration as a standard among Native Americans never left.

So to summarize this comparison, both Abryutina and Sanger have demonstrated to us

that when a culture is faced with a multiple resource environment such as reindeer herding
versus sea mammal hunting, a significant divide occurs. In other words, both regional examples
show that a single culture, at some point in its evolution with its new subsistence choices, makes
a social decision on which to follow (or to use). The initial split for utilization between sources is
probably temporary and sporadic, but as each band becomes specialized in its own niche and
generations pass, a much more noticeable difference can be recognized which may eventually
lead to two distinct groups. However, this is not to say that the two groups in either region will
remain completely separate from one another. On the contrary, both groups maintained a strong
cross-cultural exchange in resources, marriage exchanges and languages, etc. Abryutina reminds
us that: “all the Chukchi tribes kept [their] unity of language and culture” (Abryutina: 2007:
327). The Chukchi continued to gather as one group to exchange food types and even to serve in
their own military.

By Land

The continuity in the use of reindeer in the RFE is a complex, but an actually well
documented history. And the general use of reindeer as a domesticated or hunted species in
Siberia ass a whole has been documented for a long time by a number of sources. M. T. Mirov
lists some of these contributors in his history of the history of the domestication of reindeer such
as; “Rashiduddin's History of the Mongols, in the travels of Marco Polo, and in descriptions by
some Scandinavians, such as Ohthere [and] since the conquest of Siberia, by the Russians our
knowledge of reindeer domestication has been greatly enriched” (Mirov: 1945: 393) In 1920 the
first modern descriptive account on the time of reindeer domestication was published by U.T.
Serelius in which the peoples of southern Siberia were given credit for the preliminary work, but
this is difficult to prove as reindeer were initially spread from Spain to Kamchatka. A more
relative map to our discussion is provided by Mirov in figure 4. This figure shows the wide
spread existence of reindeer with a high and thorough concentration in the RFE, in fact Mirov
notes that; “domesticated reindeer were found [as far as] the island of Sakhalin [and] as far as the
northern limit of its distribution is concerned, reindeer were found on all islands of the Arctic
Ocean visited by man, except Kolguev Island” (Mirov: 1945: 396).

Mirov also provides us with an easily understandable table of those groups that were
engaged in reindeer herding at the time of publication (1945) which is important for reasons
discussed below (Mirov: 1945: 397):

PEOPLES ENGAGED IN REINDEER HUSBANDRY

At present, or in some instances in the recent past, the following peoples keep reindeer as a
domesticated animal:

Uralo-Altaic Group:

A. Finno-Ugrian 1) Lapp 2) Karelian 3) Zyrian 4) Ostyak 5) Vogul

B. Tungus 1) Tungus proper 2) Lamut 3) Oroki and other small tribes

C. Samoyed

D. Turko-Tatar1 1) Yakut

E. Turkisized Samoyed-Yeniseian of Southern Siberia 1) Irkutsk Soyot 2) Uriankhai Soyot

3) Karagas 4) Kamasin

Paleo-Asiatic Group:

1) Chukchi 2) Koryak 3) Yukaghir 4) Chuvan 5) Giliak 6) Yenisei 7) Ostyak

The latter group which concerns this paper has a few characteristics that differentiate it
from the others in practice. Besides the rare milking of reindeer, the Chukchi and Koryak
maintain large herds as opposed to the smaller herds of the Lapps. Groups in this region also
employ the heavy use of watch dogs and the lack of sledges. The riding of reindeer is very, very
rare and instead they use them to draw sledges (Mirov: 1945: 399). There is some evidence that
these two groups (roughly east and west regions of the Far North) developed reindeer herding
independently (Hat: 1919: 75-76). Mirov, on speaking on the degree of domestication has stated;
“The reindeer of the Chukchi and the Koryak are only slightly tamed and may be regarded as in
a primitive state of domestication” (Mirov: 1945: 199). What is interesting to note is the fact that
the riding of reindeer has been noted on rock engravings from the area and they have been dated
to before the Neolithic period. It is interesting to note on this subject that while it may seem
crude as compared to horse riding, one must not forget that reindeer often have weaker spines
than the horse and the animal must often be saddled by the neck instead of the back. This
example in itself can explain while some chose to ride directly on the animal and some chose to
draft it to a cart or sledge. It survives today but now reindeer riding is reserved only for
traditional ceremonies or where no other for of transportation is available. No research has been
forthcoming on the reintroduction of this practice for practical travel purposes in the area and
thus it cannot be used in the argument for continuity here.
Modern similarities

Yet what remains of the long history of reindeer hunting and herding? An example can be
found in relationship of the modern diet’s affect when compared with the traditional diet of the
past. In an attempt to explain the similarities between the ancient and present diets of the people
of Chukotka we must first briefly look at the modern “artificial” changes in the current
subsistence pattern. Victor L. Mote writes in Siberia: Worlds Apart that: “traditional societies
and their environments possess intimate, mutually beneficial relationships, in which the
disruption of one cannot fail to disrupt the other” (Mote: 1998: 139).The diets of the Peoples of
the North were severely interrupted during the Soviet Period and an almost complete exchange
occurred from a locally supported diet to that of the European palette. Boarding schools adjusted
children’s diet at a young age and sometimes this led to serious health concerns such as the
forced consumption of milk (87% of Northern Peoples suffer from lactose intolerance) which led
to a high number of diarrhea cases among students. The Tungus and other northeastern tribes do
not milk their reindeer and the Chukchi have milked their reindeer does only on rare occasions as
a delicacy since the fawns would otherwise starve (Mirov: 1945: 399). The forced relocation of
entire settlements, among other maladies, took hunters and herders away from their stocks and
hunting grounds and curtailed individual fishing habits. Plus the influx of the military and border
guards into the region during the Cold War led to a rigorous process of permits and stamps for
the hunting of sea mammals. In summing up these and other conditions not mentioned, A.
Kozlov states that; “by the end of the 1980’s, all these factors led to the forming of different food
cultures among the different age groups of Indigenous people in Chukotka” (Kozlov: 2007: 107).

As mentioned above in the article by Andrew Kozlov et al., the reindeer herder’s
diet is significantly different than that of the sea mammal hunter. There is variability in the
species of plants and animals that can be obtained and Artic ungulates produce less fat than such
species as a walrus or whale. The diet as a whole is more fragile and the loss or change in one of
the few procured species can have drastic changes in the entire life way of the culture (Kozlov:
2007: 104). Kozlov states that by 1985 the use of wild animals had decreased by 65%. This is an
important number in relation to the past, but not by its high percentage of sixty-five, yet rather by
the fact that it is not one-hundred per cent. Such a change in volume can significantly alter the
nutrient intake of a group as well as the traditions and norms that surround the consumption of a
certain resource. For example, ecologists in Khantia-Mansia and Yamalo-Nenetsia estimated that
Soviet megaprojects like the West Siberian oil and gas development project damaged or
destroyed 11 million hectares of reindeer grazing area and 28 rivers with commercial fisheries
(Mote: 1998: 139). The loss of the traditional use of land must have had disastrous effects on the
population. Not only are the size of herds reduced by the loss of grazing, but access to burials
and other affinities with the land are also disrupted.

Vitamin consumption also decreased. The white whale, as a given example of traditional
food sources versus modern, contains 5.5 times more vitamin A than beef and the restriction of
this vital food source was not easily replaced by the imported diet. Collectivization restricted the
traditional exchange of surplus food stocks among sea mammal hunters and reindeer herders.
This in turn led to even a poorer selection of food and caused a weight surplus among reindeer
herders. And those able to obtain only domestic livestock products received; “three to 11 times
more saturated fatty acids than those of sea mammal [products]” (Kozlov: 2007: 108). By the
end of the Soviet Period the traditional diet in Chukotka was all but destroyed. This begs the
question: did any connection remain with past?
 The reversion back to more locally derived foods immediately after 1991 was more
economic than a conscious choice of the traditional life style. Few in Siberia as a whole were
able to maintain a traditional way of life in the Soviet Period. Some of the Khants, Mansi and
Sel’kups were able to carry on with semi-nomadic fishing along the Ob’ and some of the more
remote Evens still persisted on with herding reindeer in Yakutia (Mote: 1998: 123). For the vast
majority though, a substantial loss in market food stocks and an overall decrease in income were
the catalyst towards individual fishing for subsistence which rose from 15.7% in 1985 to 30.3%
in 2000 (Litovka: 2001 as cited by Kozlov: 2007: 110). Furthermore, beef and poultry farms
were liquidated and also removed from the menu by external sales. The little whale meat that
was consumed in the Soviet Period (as provided by a rented whaling boat in Chukotka since
1968) was stopped due to the inability to pay for the ship’s rent. While no statistics are provided,
“amateur hunting” of this species did increase due to the lack of required permits using modern
metal boats. Before the Soviet Period almost all the Siberian natives made their own boats
(Mote: 1998: 73), Kayaks were popular among the Chukchi and Eskimos and more complex
sailing crafts were manufactured by the Evenks as well as some Chukchi. By 1998 a steady
increase in personal whaling “stabilized” (Kozlov: 2007: 111) which means that the increase was
sufficient enough to be significant.

As noted above, a division can occur in a culture when a particular group is faced with
two separate for sources. If we can define the modern influx of European foods as a “source”
then the modern peoples of RFE may be faced with the same dilemma as their ancestors did in
the Chukchi expansion of the 13th Century and the more distant comparison of native peoples of
the eastern USA. Both of the “sources” of food made available to the modern Northern Peoples
will have their dietary benefits and setbacks. European foods offer a wider availability of sweet
and savory flavors and the traditional diets offer a more balanced source of vitamins and needed
proteins as well as a link with the past. It is reasonable to say that some people will continue to
choose the western diet and some, for various reasons, will revert to the local diet. As before, a
choice has to be made by each community on how much it will embrace the new diet and the
old. And how these two new groups will interact or distinguish themselves in the present (as one
or two cultures) is briefly described below.

A significant period of ethnic revivalism followed the retreat of Soviet lifestyles and diet.
The ethnic factor began to show its face in many new ways. In 1998 a Chukchi economist named
Vladimir M. Yetylen organized a formal establishment for sea mammal hunters in Yanrakynnot
(Nielsen: 2007: 173). The idea of a formal meeting to decide how and where to hunt is nothing
new to people who rely on it as hunting is usually a group effort. The modern meeting, in a way,
had to reestablish this old idea if non-governmentally controlled hunting was going to resume.
Besides designating hunting parameters and organizing hunting expeditions the meeting also
allowed grievances to be heard about the on going social problems as well as organizing
community events. While the grievances aired at the meeting were well intentioned, the
complaints fell on deaf ears in Moscow and Nielsen eventually explains that this resulted in a
feeling of powerlessness by the hunters which damaged the group’s integrity. Yet despite this
startling realization that Moscow is little concerned about the hunter’s grievances, two important
facts cannot be missed. The first is that the meeting was allowed to take place at all without
interference and the second as Nielsen writes; “[this meeting] exemplified how one actually can
take matters into one’s own hands” (Nielsen: 2007: 173). Ultimately as this and other groups
gain seniority and legitimacy within the community their voice may be better heard.

Once this revitalization of self-reliability took root the most important link with the past
became apparent, the idea self-reliance and the connection one can share with their environment.
Andrew Kozlov presents some interesting statistics (Kozlov: 2007: 111-112) that are presented
below:
Total preference towards a traditional diet:
Reindeer hunters (inland populations): 64%
Sea mammal hunters (coastal populations): 70%

Preference for traditional diet based on age (+40 age group):

Inland populations (reindeer meat): 80%
Coastal Populations (sea mammal meat): 66%

Preference for traditional diet based on age (-40 age group):

Inland populations (reindeer meat): 40%
Coastal Populations (sea mammal meat): 76%

Note: statistics are for the preference of diet, not consumption.

While the percentages vary somewhat between coastal and inland populations, both show a
significantly high number of those surveyed desired local foods, compared with a preference for
western provisions. Desire is important, if not more important than actual consumption in some
ways. This means that despite variability and the stereotype that Western food is better a
conscious act has occurred to consume the local diet by choice rather than by force (such as
economic availability). In fact, Kozlov mentions that often during the Soviet Period the
consumption of local food sources continued, but in secret in an attempt to avoid suspicion and
embarrassment by newcomers and other indigenous groups with western tastes Kozlov: 2007:
112). Once the stigma was released, the consumption of whale, walrus, seal and reindeer became
more wide spread due to the symbolism of its consumption as a rite of ethic identity.

Furthermore, the high percentage of consumption by the younger population could be a

sign of the rebel factor. This factor comes into play during times of identity crises among a
population that is running parallel with general social upheaval or change. Such a similar
comparison can be seen at Wounded Knee, South Dakota in the Untied States in 1973. In early
spring of that year a general uprising by the American Indian Movement coincided with a revival
of traditional life ways and diets (Bonney: 1977: 209) along with the more general social change
found in the United States at that time. Feeling the tide of the concept of the Indian had changed,
local activists made a clean break with the lifestyles of the dominant culture, as well as
attempting a formal separation of polities. The latter unfortunately ended in bloodshed.

A naturally stronger restoration of traditional manners is found in rural areas as a whole.

Rural areas traditionally suffer greater in high employment averages than urban populations, thus
the economic catalyst for local foodstuffs described above comes in to play faster. But regardless
of the afore mentioned causation the ethnic factor also has a higher result in rural areas, as these
areas are often found to be more conservative in any culture. Ready access to local sources of
food by these populations in small villages should not be overlooked as well. In other words, it is
much easier to hunt reindeer if they are outside your front door rather than several kilometers
away. Thus, a combined cocktail of tougher economic availability and ready access to local
sources of food make for the perfect link with the past.

One final note revival of the past can be found in the recent reintroduction of
exchangeable resources. In 2003 Chukotkan hunters found a use for the thousands of unused
sealskins (тюленья кожа) that were usually discarded. The recently elected governor,
Abramovich, established an industrial process that utilized the sealskins for sale during the high
demand of the early 2000’s (Nielsen: 2007: 176). This not only provided a reliable source of
income for hunters, but it also offered an income to take pride in. As in the past, commodities
could be traded for local goods instead of being “handed-out” in a one-way route to the RFE.
Continual resourcefulness of the use of locally found products such as this will only continue to
improve the standards of living as well as the identity of self in the region.

Conclusion

Few researchers doubt that the use of local resources, art, as well as the current trends in
diet has had its origins in the past. Episodes of population changes in the 13th/14th and 20th
Centuries have caused considerable adjustments to the source and availability of foodstuffs. Yet,
in both cases adjustments and adaptations were made successful. Although Kozlov suggests a
differing opinion; he states that; “One thing is clear, neither sea mammal hunters nor reindeer
herders turned back to the past” (Kozlov: 2007: 116). He argues that similar research is lacking
in comparison to other Artic regions in that this is a formal and substantial return to the former
diet. But comparisons can be found in the past as Chukchi populations were able to adjust to the
incursion of peoples for the inland portion of the area. David Sanger offers evidence that coastal
and inland populations, while related, were two distinct populations with different diets. As the
inland population settled in the coastal region they brought a new source of subsistence as well
as adapting to the new environment. Thus, as indigenous populations continue to adjust their
relationship to the second diet (regardless of where it originates from) and it is reasonable to
suggest that a similar adaptation will follow. Kozlov is correct in his assumption in as far as that
a complete return to the sole use of indigenous resources will probably not occur, but given that
cultural revivalism throughout the northern hemisphere is on the rise, it is likely that the local
diet will take a leading role in reestablishing the norm.

Furthermore, art production, like food resources, also has had to go through a second
period of adjustment following the production of art for trade in the 19th Century. As physical
(archaeological) and psychological links with the past are reestablished contemporary artists will
be able to rediscover the uses and forms of their craft as seen through the eyes of their ancestors.
Specimens for trade will probably continue to be manufactured for sale, but items for personal
use may follow as the taboos on local religious practices die off. As a whole, the connection with
the past in practices and belief has certainly maintained a line with the past, and this line should
be able to thicken as the connection itself is realized to exist.