Author: admin

Elementor #919

Aesti – Historical references

Tacitus Germania illustration by J.Bleau 1645 Tacitus Germania ilustration by J.Bleau 1645

 

The area of ancient Estland and its people – also known by people as: Aestii, Aestui, Hesti, Heasti, Hestia, Aesti, Aisri, Esti, Estum, Iste, Istum, Aistr, Eistr, Igauni, чуди – was located on the coast of the Baltic sea – also know as: Suebian, Venedi, Varangian sea.

To the North over the Baltic Estland neighboured with ancient Finland (Soome, Lapi), to the West over the Baltic sea with ancient Kven- and Gotland, Suebia (modern Sweden) and Norland (modern Norway).

The seagoing people around Baltic sea were later also called Varangians or Vikings (´vik´ refering to ´bay´), who were traders and seafarers, who inhabited their Northern European homelands across wide areas of Europe, and explored westwards to Iceland, Greenland, and Vinland (Americas). But also South Eastwards with people on coasts of the Mediterran sea. They traded with fur, tusks, seal fat, honey, salves and amber etc.

The Vikings military, mercantile and demographic expansion constitutes an important element in the early medieval history of Scandinavia, Estonia, the British Isles, France, Kievan Rus’, Sicily etc.

The Aesti (also Aestii, Astui or Aests) were an ancient people first described by the Roman historian Tacitus in his treatise Germania (circa 98 AD). According to Tacitus, the territory of Aesti was located somewhere east of the Suiones (Swedes) and west of the Sitones (possibly the ancient “Kvens”), on the Suebian (Baltic) Sea.  This and other evidence suggests that they lived in or near the present-day Russian enclave of Kaliningrad Oblast (previously East Prussia). The Aestii and the modern ethnonyms of Estonia  arephonological similar.

Tacitus’ mention of a cult of the mother of the gods among the Aesti along the eastern Baltic coast applies to the ancient pagan religions – “taarausk”, belief of “Taara” often depicted female or “maausk”, belief in Mother Earth the giver of life.

Tacitus also refers to the Fenni living next to the Aesti — the Fenni being ancestors to the Finns and the Sámi would situate them closest to the Estlandians. Ultimately, Tacitus’ use of Aesti could apply equally well to either a specific people or to a grouping of ethnically diverse peoples across a wider area on the East coast of the Baltic sea.

“Upon the right of the Suebian Sea the Aestian nations reside, who use the same customs and attire with the Suebians (historically settled by Germanic / Gothic people). 

They worship the Mother of the Gods. As the characteristic of their national superstition, they wear the images of wild boars. This alone serves them for arms, this is the safeguard of all, and by this every worshipper of the Goddess is secured even amidst his foes. Rare amongst them is the use of weapons of iron, but frequent that of clubs.In producing of grain and the other fruits of the earth, they labour with more assiduity and patience than is suitable to the usual laziness of Germans. 

Nay, they even search the deep, and of all the rest are the only people who gather amber. They call it glesum*, and find it amongst the shallows and upon the very shore. But, according to the ordinary incuriosity and ignorance of Barbarians, they have neither learnt, nor do they inquire, what is its nature, or from what cause it is produced. 

In truth it lay long neglected amongst the other gross discharges of the sea; till from our luxury, it gained a name and value. To themselves it is of no use: they gather it rough, they expose it in pieces coarse and unpolished, and for it receive a price with wonder. (Germania, chapter XLV).”

* – Glasum propably refers to Estonian word “klaas”, similar to the estonian word “klaar” (“clear”).

Sixth Century historian Jordanes makes two references the Aesti in his book “The Origins and the Deeds of the Goths”, which was a treatment of Cassiodorus’ longer book (which no longer survives) on the history of the Goths. The first quote places the Aestii beyond the Vidivarii, on the shore of the Baltic: “a subject race, likewise hold the shore of Ocean.”

The next quote concerns the subjugation of the Aesti by Hermanaric (Ermanaric), king of the Gothic Greuthungi: “This ruler also subdued by his wisdom and might the race of the Aesti, who dwell on the farthest shore of the German Ocean (Baltic sea). Jordanes hints Aesti “likewide hold shores of ocean“, refers correctly to the Balto-Finnic origin of the Estland people the Aesti.  Til present day Finno-Ugric Sami people are still inhabiting the coastal areas of Atlantic ocean the modern Norwegan sea.

See some histroic maps:

Place names

The Old Prussian towns of “Kaup” and “Truso” on the Baltic were the one of the river-ways to the south – to Black and Mediterran sea. “Kaup” is a purely Estonian (Finnic) word meaning “goods” or “trade”, that is appropriate to the location in the mouth of Vistula river, where the Vistula-Dniepr river-way to Black and Mediterran sea started.

In Modern Germany still many villages bear the name “kyela” – meaning “village” in Balto-Finnic languages (in Estonian: küla, in Finnish: kylä) suggesting that the Finnic language could have also been native for Southern coast of the Baltic sea basin area before arrival of the Yamna people from Sarmatian plane. 

 

Bloody houses – a film about property reform

Real-life documentary about Estonian property reform
Directed by Toomas Lepp

The ownership reform carried out in the newly independent Estonia was supposed to create the conditions for the transition to a market economy. At the same time, ownership reform has affected every person living in Estonia, and those in power have often tried to refrain from telling the truth and disclosing the facts to the wider public. The mainstream media, as well as government circles, have generally been silent on the injustice, human suffering and sometimes even crime involved in property reform.

Ownership reform has made thousands of Estonian families homeless, raising children and spending the elderly generations working for the Estonian state. All of them were deprived of their home ownership by law. These people are not subject to the principle of equal treatment in Estonia – they could not privatize their housing for their working years.

This injustice has not yet been remedied! So far, the state has not attempted to do so, nor has it taken any initiative to remedy the damage done to the people.

The film was commissioned by the Tallinn City Office
Toomas Lepp
Estonian Filmmakers´Union
Independent producer
toomas@lepp.ee

For clarification;
On 17 September 1997, the Minister of Economic Affairs Jaak Leimann addressed the Estonian Parliament. Quote from his speech: “Indeed, we have to admit that nearly one hundred thousand are people who could not privatize their housing like others for their working years.”

Watch the movie with english subtitles: https://reforms.ee/karm-film/

Euronews answers: Who are Europe’s indigenous peoples and what are their struggles?

Originally published in EuroNews, 09.08.2019

From Scandinavia’s Saamis to Greenland’s Inuits, Europe’s indigenous peoples represent vibrant communities with multi-millennial histories. Yet they are still struggling for recognition.

On the frontlines of climate change, they are faced with the degradation of their environments and livelihoods, the disappearance of their ancestral languages, and the exploitation of their traditional lands, often rich in resources.

Who are Europe’s indigenous peoples? What are the challenges faced by their communities and is Europe doing enough to uphold their rights?

On the occasion of the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples (August 9), Euronews looks into these questions.

What defines indigenous peoples?
While there is no universally agreed definition of what it means to be indigenous, the United Nations has developed the following understanding of the term:

• “Self-identification as indigenous peoples at the individual level and accepted by the community as their member;
• historical continuity with pre-colonial and/or pre-settler societies;
• strong link to territories and surrounding natural resources;
• distinct social, economic or political systems;
• distinct language, culture and beliefs;
• form non-dominant groups of society;
• resolve to maintain and reproduce their ancestral environments and systems as distinctive peoples and communities.”

Who are Europe’s indigenous peoples?
The vast majority of Europe’s indigenous people can be found in the Arctic region.

The Saami
The Saami people live in Sweden, Norway, Finland and Russia. While there is no reliable figure, they represent an estimated 50,000-100,000 people, according to the International Working Group on Indigenous Affairs.

“We are a nomadic people that follow the reindeers’ herding rhythm most of the year, ” Elle Merete Omma, Head of the EU unit of the Saami Council, told Euronews.

“Nature and land are very important to us — they are the cornerstones of our worldview,” she continued.

Greenland’s Inuits
In Greenland, a self-governing territory within the Danish Realm, out of a total 57,691 of inhabitants 89.6% are Greenlandic Inuits, according to 2018 estimates cited by the International Working Group on Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA).

Hunting has always been central to Inuit cultures, and until a few decades ago Greenland’s indigenous people lived completely off the land and sea. Today the economy has shifted and also includes commercial fisheries, tourism and emerging oil and mining industries.

Russia’s indigenous peoples
At the crossroads of Europe and Asia, Russia is home to 160 distinct peoples, including 40 that are officially recognized as indigenous.

“These are groups of less than 50,000 members, who are able to preserve some aspects of their traditional ways of life and continue to inhabit their territories,” IWGIA said in its latest report.

Among them are the Nenets of the Siberian Arctic (below see picture), who are reindeer herders, or the nomadic Enets, which number just a few hundred individuals.

According to the NGO Cultural Survival, although Russia’s indigenous peoples only make up 0.2% of the total population (about 260,000 individuals), they inhabit about two-thirds of the country’s territory.

What are the key challenges facing Europe’s indigenous peoples?
Climate change
Indigenous peoples in Europe, whose cultures and livelihoods depend so much on their natural environment, are on the frontlines of climate change.

Scientists estimate that the Arctic is warming up at a rate twice the global average.

READ: Greenland ice sheet ‘rapidly melting’ — here’s how it will affect us all

As sea ice melts, the hunting, fishing and herding activities that provide the basis of indigenous communities’ livelihoods are at risk.

Indigenous peoples across the world are disproportionally impacted by climate change even though they contribute least to greenhouse emissions, according to the UN.

Endangered languages
The survival of their ancestral languages is also among the key concerns of indigenous peoples across the world and Europe is no exception.

The United Nations has declared 2019 as the International Year of Indigenous Languages, noting that 40% of the estimated 6,700 languages spoken around the world were in danger of disappearing and that a majority were indigenous.

“Languages play a crucial role in the daily life of indigenous peoples,” said Omma. “Not only as a tool for communication, education, social integration but also as a source for each person’s unique identity, cultural history, traditions.”

“But despite that, indigenous languages continue to disappear at an alarming rate and that’s also true for the Saami languages,” she added.

“I think in that regard, the EU has something they can contribute to. The EU is a multilingual institution and they have a lot of knowledge on how to use resources and capacity to strengthen languages. We want to see what we can learn from the EU.”

Land and resources
Resource and extraction industries on their traditional lands are another vital challenge for indigenous peoples.

“What we see is that economic development often conflicts with already established traditional Saami business sectors. Mining, oil and gas all have a short living span, but traditional Saami food industries for instance, such as reindeer herding or fishing, focus on sustainable use of resources,” Omma said.

“From an EU perspective, I find it contradictory that there is more awareness about how EU investment should be carried out on indigenous land outside the EU, but less focus on how investments inside the EU affect Saami cultures and way of life,” she added.

Is Europe doing enough to uphold indigenous peoples’ rights?
“The EU has a really sophisticated set of rules, code of conducts when it comes to indigenous peoples outside of Europe but not so much when it comes to its own indigenous peoples,” Omma said.

External action
As the largest provider of development aid in the world, the EU has developed far-reaching policies when it comes to engagement with indigenous peoples in international cooperation.

On the occasion of the World’s International Day of Indigenous Peoples 2019, EU High Representative for Foreign Policy Federica Mogherini issued a statement reiterating the bloc’s commitment to “promote and fight for indigenous languages and cultures.”

It provided examples of the EU’s external action in this area, like “in Namibia, where the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights contributes to the revitalisation of endangered indigenous languages, or in the Chittagong Hills Tracts of Bangladesh where we helped develop a multilingual mother tongue education programme in seven different tribal languages.”

The statement didn’t make specific mention of indigenous languages and cultures in Europe.

Indigenous peoples’ rights inside the EU
Euronews contacted the European Commission to ask what the EU was doing to support indigenous peoples’ rights inside the bloc.

“This is an issue that we definitely follow within the EU,” a Commission spokesperson said.

“In particular, the EU contributes to respecting the rights of indigenous people from the angle of non-discrimination (Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU) and the overall EU policy on non-discrimination.”

“I think we need to improve EU regulatory frameworks so it has the same obligations and codes of conduct towards indigenous peoples inside the EU and outside the EU,” Omma said.

She provided various examples, including the current project to build an Arctic railway, which is likely to kill reindeers if no mitigating measures are implemented.

The Saami activist also noted that infrastructure projects financed by the European Investment Bank included no specific requirements on their impact for indigenous peoples’ rights, besides general mentions of human rights, which wouldn’t be possible for development projects funded through external action.

But the head of the EU unit of the Saami Council also said the EU had “great potential” when it came to developing indigenous peoples’ rights, considering its experience reflecting on and accepting different cultures and opinions.

Dialogue between the Saamis and the EU, which has been ongoing since 2012, has intensified since 2016, Omma said.

Euronews answers: Who are Europes indigenous people?

From Scandinavia’s Saamis to Greenland’s Inuits, Europe’s indigenous peoples represent vibrant communities with multi-millennial histories. Yet they are still struggling for recognition.

Originally published in EuroNews, 09.08.2019

On the frontlines of climate change, they are faced with the degradation of their environments and livelihoods, the disappearance of their ancestral languages, and the exploitation of their traditional lands, often rich in resources.

Who are Europe’s indigenous peoples? What are the challenges faced by their communities and is Europe doing enough to uphold their rights?

On the occasion of the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples (August 9), Euronews looks into these questions.

What defines indigenous peoples?
While there is no universally agreed definition of what it means to be indigenous, the United Nations has developed the following understanding of the term:

• “Self-identification as indigenous peoples at the individual level and accepted by the community as their member;
• historical continuity with pre-colonial and/or pre-settler societies;
• strong link to territories and surrounding natural resources;
• distinct social, economic or political systems;
• distinct language, culture and beliefs;
• form non-dominant groups of society;
• resolve to maintain and reproduce their ancestral environments and systems as distinctive peoples and communities.”

Who are Europe’s indigenous peoples?
The vast majority of Europe’s indigenous people can be found in the Arctic region.

The Saami
The Saami people live in Sweden, Norway, Finland and Russia. While there is no reliable figure, they represent an estimated 50,000-100,000 people, according to the International Working Group on Indigenous Affairs.

“We are a nomadic people that follow the reindeers’ herding rhythm most of the year, ” Elle Merete Omma, Head of the EU unit of the Saami Council, told Euronews.

“Nature and land are very important to us — they are the cornerstones of our worldview,” she continued.

Greenland’s Inuits
In Greenland, a self-governing territory within the Danish Realm, out of a total 57,691 of inhabitants 89.6% are Greenlandic Inuits, according to 2018 estimates cited by the International Working Group on Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA).

Hunting has always been central to Inuit cultures, and until a few decades ago Greenland’s indigenous people lived completely off the land and sea. Today the economy has shifted and also includes commercial fisheries, tourism and emerging oil and mining industries.

Russia’s indigenous peoples
At the crossroads of Europe and Asia, Russia is home to 160 distinct peoples, including 40 that are officially recognized as indigenous.

“These are groups of less than 50,000 members, who are able to preserve some aspects of their traditional ways of life and continue to inhabit their territories,” IWGIA said in its latest report.

Among them are the Nenets of the Siberian Arctic (below see picture), who are reindeer herders, or the nomadic Enets, which number just a few hundred individuals.

According to the NGO Cultural Survival, although Russia’s indigenous peoples only make up 0.2% of the total population (about 260,000 individuals), they inhabit about two-thirds of the country’s territory.

What are the key challenges facing Europe’s indigenous peoples?
Climate change
Indigenous peoples in Europe, whose cultures and livelihoods depend so much on their natural environment, are on the frontlines of climate change.

Scientists estimate that the Arctic is warming up at a rate twice the global average.

READ: Greenland ice sheet ‘rapidly melting’ — here’s how it will affect us all

As sea ice melts, the hunting, fishing and herding activities that provide the basis of indigenous communities’ livelihoods are at risk.

Indigenous peoples across the world are disproportionally impacted by climate change even though they contribute least to greenhouse emissions, according to the UN.

Endangered languages
The survival of their ancestral languages is also among the key concerns of indigenous peoples across the world and Europe is no exception.

The United Nations has declared 2019 as the International Year of Indigenous Languages, noting that 40% of the estimated 6,700 languages spoken around the world were in danger of disappearing and that a majority were indigenous.

“Languages play a crucial role in the daily life of indigenous peoples,” said Omma. “Not only as a tool for communication, education, social integration but also as a source for each person’s unique identity, cultural history, traditions.”

“But despite that, indigenous languages continue to disappear at an alarming rate and that’s also true for the Saami languages,” she added.

“I think in that regard, the EU has something they can contribute to. The EU is a multilingual institution and they have a lot of knowledge on how to use resources and capacity to strengthen languages. We want to see what we can learn from the EU.”

Land and resources
Resource and extraction industries on their traditional lands are another vital challenge for indigenous peoples.

“What we see is that economic development often conflicts with already established traditional Saami business sectors. Mining, oil and gas all have a short living span, but traditional Saami food industries for instance, such as reindeer herding or fishing, focus on sustainable use of resources,” Omma said.

“From an EU perspective, I find it contradictory that there is more awareness about how EU investment should be carried out on indigenous land outside the EU, but less focus on how investments inside the EU affect Saami cultures and way of life,” she added.

Is Europe doing enough to uphold indigenous peoples’ rights?
“The EU has a really sophisticated set of rules, code of conducts when it comes to indigenous peoples outside of Europe but not so much when it comes to its own indigenous peoples,” Omma said.

External action
As the largest provider of development aid in the world, the EU has developed far-reaching policies when it comes to engagement with indigenous peoples in international cooperation.

On the occasion of the World’s International Day of Indigenous Peoples 2019, EU High Representative for Foreign Policy Federica Mogherini issued a statement reiterating the bloc’s commitment to “promote and fight for indigenous languages and cultures.”

It provided examples of the EU’s external action in this area, like “in Namibia, where the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights contributes to the revitalisation of endangered indigenous languages, or in the Chittagong Hills Tracts of Bangladesh where we helped develop a multilingual mother tongue education programme in seven different tribal languages.”

The statement didn’t make specific mention of indigenous languages and cultures in Europe.

Indigenous peoples’ rights inside the EU
Euronews contacted the European Commission to ask what the EU was doing to support indigenous peoples’ rights inside the bloc.

“This is an issue that we definitely follow within the EU,” a Commission spokesperson said.

“In particular, the EU contributes to respecting the rights of indigenous people from the angle of non-discrimination (Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU) and the overall EU policy on non-discrimination.”

“I think we need to improve EU regulatory frameworks so it has the same obligations and codes of conduct towards indigenous peoples inside the EU and outside the EU,” Omma said.

She provided various examples, including the current project to build an Arctic railway, which is likely to kill reindeers if no mitigating measures are implemented.

The Saami activist also noted that infrastructure projects financed by the European Investment Bank included no specific requirements on their impact for indigenous peoples’ rights, besides general mentions of human rights, which wouldn’t be possible for development projects funded through external action.

But the head of the EU unit of the Saami Council also said the EU had “great potential” when it came to developing indigenous peoples’ rights, considering its experience reflecting on and accepting different cultures and opinions.

Dialogue between the Saamis and the EU, which has been ongoing since 2012, has intensified since 2016, Omma said.

Jaak Prozes: Soome-ugri rahvaste vandenõu(d)

avaldatud “Soome-Ugri sõlmed”, Fenno Ugria Asutus 2018

Pole kuulda olnud, et Venemaal tähistataks inimõiguste päeva. Siiski peetakse seal 30. oktoobril poliitiliste repressioonide ohvrite mälestuspäeva – see on päev, mil 1974. aastal alustati Mordva ja Permi vangilaagrites näljastreiki. Kuidas riik oma kurbade või rõõmsate tähtpäevade tähistamist korraldab, on iga riigi enda otsustada, ent Venemaal on kaasnenud repressioonides kannatanute ja hukkunute mälestamisega teatud ametlik retoorika − represseerimised küll olid, aga need olid „osaliselt õigustatud“, või mingeid rahvuspõhiseid repressioone polnudki, vaid kõik lähtus klassivõitluse printsiipidest. Lisatakse, et hukkunuid polnudki nii palju, et ka NKVD töötajad kannatasid jne. Neile seisukohtadele pöörasid 2017. aasta detsembris tähelepanu 33 akadeemikut, kes esitasid avalikkusele pöördumise, milles juhtisid tähelepanu asjaolule, et FSB juht Aleksander Bortnikov on püüdnud seda kõike õigustada, öeldes näiteks, et represseeriti ka 20 tuhandet NKVD töötajat. Kui ulatuslikud ja ohvriterohked repressioonid tegelikult olid, ei teata tänini. Erinevatel andmetel represseeriti 6−7 miljonit inimest, neist 3,5 miljonit rahvuspõhiselt. Repressioonide kõrghetkel, nn suure terrori ajal (1937−1938) arreteeriti 1,5 miljonit inimest, kellest lasti maha 700 000. Tegelikult on arvud tunduvalt suuremad, sest sinna hulka pole loetud Ukraina (golodomor), Volgamaa ja Uuralite näljahädades hukkunuid. Neid oli kokku kuni 8 miljonit. Leidis aset üks jõhkramaid inimõiguste rikkumisi maailma riikide ajaloos, mistõttu peaks olema kõrgendatud tähelepanu all ka see, kuidas Venemaal suhtutakse repressioonides hukkunute mälestuse jäädvustamisse. 2017. aasta 23. mail ilmus Mordva vabariigi ajalehes Pealinn S artikkel pealkirjaga „Professor Abramov ajab jama“. Artiklis kirjutati, et Mordva riikliku ülikooli ajalooprofessor Vladimir Abramov soovib välja anda aastail 1917−1953 represseeritud eestlaste martüüriumi, kus oleks kirjas nende elulood, arreteerimise aeg, karistused ja väljasaatmiskohad. Kirjatüki autor Vladimir Lipatov ja artiklis sõna saanud teine Mordva ülikooli õppejõud kritiseerisid Abramovit väites, et selliste nimekirjade avaldamine olevat vaid välismaalaste – eeskätt pribalt’ide − huvides, keda ei huvita mitte ajalooline õiglus, vaid soov levitada desinformatsiooni Stalini režiimi ja poliitiliste repressioonide kohta NSV Liidus, iseäranis selle kohta, mis toimus soomeugrilaste aladel. See olevat aga „kingitus Venemaa vaenlastele“. Artiklis seisab: „Pärast kasutavad nad seda

ajaloovõltsijatele mõeldud Venemaa vastases infosõjas, mis moonutab Teise maailmasõja aegset NSV Liidu ajalugu, väites, et nõukogude riigil olevat olnud agressiivne välispoliitika.“ Artikkel lõpeb küsimusega, et kuidas saab selline russofoobne raamat üldse Mordva riiklikus ülikoolis ilmuda ja seal selline professor töötada? Asi päädis sellega, et Abramovit ei hukatud ega saadetud välja – nagu oleks juhtunud 1930ndatel −, ent ta sai ise aru, et on teinud kingituse Venemaa vaenlastele, ja raamat jäi ilmumata. Professor lasti töölt ikkagi lahti. Kuidas olid aga tegelikult lood repressioonide rahvuspõhise olemusega? Soome-ugri rahvaste represseerimiseks fabritseeriti vandenõuteooria soomeugri rahvaste vabastamisest, milles väideti, et soome-ugri rahvastel on illegaalsed kontaktid Soomega. On tõsiasi, et maride, komide, udmurtide ja mordvalaste esimese põlvkonna intelligentsil olid tekkinud tihedad sidemed Soome vaimuringkondadega juba enne Esimest maailmasõda. Soomlased olid neile rahvastele eeskujuks etnograafia, folkloristika ja fennougristika arendamisel. 1920. aastatel käisid paljud soome-ugri rahvaste juhtivad õpetlased Soomes. See sai neile saatuslikuks, sest 1930ndatel tehti nn valge-Soomest vaenlase kuju. Enne soome-ugri rahvaste vabastamise vandenõud oli Venemaal avastatud mitmeid grupeeringuid, märkimisväärseim neist 1925. aastal loodud Leningradi Soome-Ugri Rahvaste Uurimise Selts. Organisatsiooni eesotsas seisis fennougrist Dmitri Bubrihh (1890−1949). Organisatsiooni süüdistati 1930. aastal idealismis ja vääras ideoloogias, sest soome etnograafia olevat fašistlik ja selle eesmärgiks on „õigustada Soome territoriaalseid püüdlusi Põhjalahest Novgorodi ja Uuralini“. Lisaks olevat „Suur-Soome idee soome etnograafi a lipukiri“. Peale organisatsiooni reorganiseerimist saadeti NSV Liidu Teaduste Akadeemiale kaebekirju, et Tallinnas, Helsingis ja Budapestis toimuvat soomeugri kongressid, mis on seotud poliitiliste organisatsioonidega, nagu Ingeri Liit, Akadeemiline Karjala Selts, Soome-Ugri Selts jt. Sellel liikumisel olevat suured rahalised vahendid, neid toetatakse valitsuste tasandil ja nad annavad välja ajakirju, millest osa ainult maskeerub teaduslikeks, nagu näiteks Soome-Ugri Seltsi Toimetised. Nii tekitati kujutelm, et „fašistlik“ Soome valmistab NSV Liidu pinnal ette soome-ugri rahvastest koosnevat viiendat kolonni. Teiseks oluliseks vandenõuks oli nn mari föderalistide kohtuasi ehk maride vandenõu. Süüdistuse kohaselt oli grupi eesmärgiks eraldada Mari autonoomne oblast ja teised soome-ugri territooriumid NSV Liidust ja ühendada need Soomega või luua Soome protektoraadi all Soome-ugri föderatsioon, mistõttu sisaldus ka grupi nimes sõna „föderalistid“. Maride natsionalism seisnes aga selles, et nad uurisid oma rahva keelt, folkloori, etnograafiat, püüdsid säilitada ekspeditsioonidel kogutud vanavara ja rääkisid loengutes maride sugulusest eestlaste, soomlaste ja ungarlastega. Õpetaja ja koolijuhi Leonid Mendijarovi tunnistusest saab hea ülevaate sellest, millisena marid Soomet tajusid. 1931. aasta 28. aprillil

kirjutab ta oma ülestunnistuses: „Soome küsimus omab ajalugu, mis ulatub Oktoobrirevolutsiooni eelsesse aega. Huvi Soome ja soomlaste vastu tekkis teadusteooria baasilt, et marid ja soomlased on hõimurahvad, kelle teed on ajaloolistel põhjustel lahknenud. Mari intelligentsi jaoks on Soomel ja soomlastel eriline oreool, sest nad on osanud vabaneda, tõrjudes Rootsi iket, samuti pääseda Vene rõhumise alt. Ja lõpuks luua oma kõrgkultuuri.“ SOFIN – Soome(-ugri) rahvaste vabastamise liit 1932. aasta mais, aasta peale mari föderalistide kohtuasja „avastati“ Udmurdimaal Iževskis Soome-ugri rahvaste vabastamise liit, mille lõi süüdistuse järgi tuntud udmurdi kodanlik kirjanik Kuzebai Gerd, tehes seda soome ja eesti „interventlike ringkondade ülesandel“. Vastavalt süüdistusele oli SOFINi peamiseks eesmärgiks relvastatud ülestõusu korraldamine Udmurdi autonoomses ringkonnas, mis pidi levima teistesse autonoomsetesse piirkondadesse (Mari, Mordva jt), moodustades lõpuks demokraatliku juhtimisega ühtse Soome-ugri föderatsiooni. Lisaks selle idee pooldamisele olevat tegeldud ka ettevalmistustöödega, et korraldada terroristlike akte parteitöötajate vastu. Vandenõulased olevat tegelnud ka aktiivse spionaažiga Eesti ja Soome kasuks. Samuti moonutati nõukogude rahvuspoliitika eesmärke, kasutades selleks aja- ja ilukirjanduslikke võimalusi, ning püüti kontakti astuda teistegi soome-ugri rahvaste kontrrevolutsiooniliste jõududega, samuti Tatarstani vastavate organisatsioonidega. Süüdistusele püüti anda võimalikult mastaapne iseloom ja tõestada pseudoteadusliku „analüüsiga“ selle õigsust. Seepärast oli näiteks 132-leheküljelises süüdistuses terve peatükk, mis käsitles „kontrrevolutsioonilise rahvusliku liikumise asutamist ja ajalugu“. Seal on kirjas, kuidas udmurdi intelligentsil tekib Udmurdimaa vabastamise idee seoses sümpaatiatega Soome ja soomlaste vastu. Just nemad olid võrreldes teistega „eesrindlikuks rahvaks“. Kõik rajanes juba tollal laialt levinud teooriale soome-ugri rahvaste sugulusest. Pärast Oktoobrirevolutsiooni olla udmurdid töötanud välja vastava tegevuskava: saavutada täielik eraldatus Venemaast; ühineda Eesti-Soome kapitaliga; seejärel ühineda Põhja-Soome ühendriiki kui iseseisev dominioon; võimsale udmurdi kodanlusele tuginedes arendada suurtööstust; laiendada Udmurtia autonoomia piire; kehtestada udmurdi rahva diktatuur vene elanikkonna üle Udmurdimaal; jätta venelased ilma poliitilistest õigustest; moodustada Udmurdi piiskopkond; kukutada nõukogude võim. Toimikusse lisati SOFINi skeem, mille eesotsas oli Soome-Ugri Selts. Vande nõulasteks olid Yrjö Wichmann (1868−1932), väljapaistev fennougrist, Helsingi ülikooli professor, kes oskas komi, mari ja udmurdi keelt; SoomeUgri Seltsi juhatuse aseesimees Uuno Taavi Sirelius(lß72−l929), etnograaf, akadeemik, esimene soome-ugri etnograafiaprofessor Helsingi ülikoolis ja

kummalisel kombel üks SOFINi algatajatest pärast enda surma; Albert Hämäläinen (1881−1949), etnograaf, kellest sai soome-ugri etnograafi a kateedri juhataja ja professor pärast Sireliuse surma. Tema doktoritöö käsitles mari, mordva ja udmurdi pulmakombeid. Vandenõulaste hulka olevat kuulunud veel soomeugri etnoloogia üks alusepanija Ilmari Manninen (1894−1935), kes oli Eesti Rahva Muuseumi direktor (1922−1928) ning Tartu ja Helsingi ülikoolide õppejõud; inegerisoomlane Sulo Haltsonen (1903−1973), eelkõige ingerisoome, aga ka teiste läänemeresoome rahvarühmade uurija, ning Jalo Kalima (1884−1952), Kaasani ülkooli soome-ugri keelte professor, kes jätkas 1917. aastast samal ametikohal Helsingi ülikoolis. Seega seisid vandenõu eesotsas fennougristid, 1883. aastal asutatud ja soome-ugri rahvaste koostööd arendava Soome-Ugri Seltsi liikmed. Afääri väljamõtlejad väitsid, et vandenõusse oli tihedalt haaratud ka Soome saatkond, eesotsas suursaadik Antti Hackzelliga (1881−1946), kes oli aastatel 1922−1927 Soome suursaadik Moskvas ning 1932−1936 Soome välisminister. Eestlaste roll vandenõus oli tagasihoidlikum. Keeleteadlastest on mainitud Julius Marki(lß9o−l9s9), Tartu ülikooli uurali keeleteaduste professorit, hilisemat TA asepresidenti. Margil olid tekkinud soome-ugri intelligentsiga tihedad sidemed 1920. aastatel, samuti reisis ta 1930ndatel korra mööda Volga jõge. Mark valdas muidugi erinevaid soome-ugri keeli ja ta doktoritöö käsitles läänemeresoome keeli. Samuti oli tal tihe koostöö soomlastega, kuna lõpetas Helsingi ülikooli magistritööga ersa keele alal. Ta oli Vabadussõjas osalenud tõe ja õigluse eest võitleja, põhimõttekindel inimene. Teine väidetav eestlasest vandenõuteooria juhtfiguur oli Aleksander Põrk(1873−1933), tuntud vanavarakoguja ja taarausuliste juht. Teadusringkondades tunti teda kui Eesti Rahva Muuseumis paiknevate soome-ugri vanimate eksponaatide kogujat, kes käis hõimurahvastel korduvalt külas juba 20. saj alguses. Ta osales sõnavõtuga nii maride kui ka udmurtide rahvuskongressil 1917. ja 1918. aastal. Just tema mõjutusel tegid need kongressid emotsionaalse pöördumise eestlaste poole. Põhiliseks süüdlaseks tehti aga Kuzebai Gerd, kes rääkis naiivselt uurijale, kuidas ta on Soomest vaimustunud, et Soome on talle eeskujuks ning ta peab soomlasi väga kultuurseks ja hästi arenenud rahvaks. Samas leidis ta, et udmurdid on maha jäänud ja peavad tegema nii nagu soomlased. Ülekuulamine läheb aina tõsisemaks ja lõpuks võtab ta − nagu ka enamik teisi − vead omaks. Gerd tunnistab ülekuulamistel, et ta on Soome saatkonnast saanud järgmised juhtnöörid: a) tuleb ühendada idapoolsed soome rahvad; b) tuleb omaks võtta „soome arengutee“; c) tuleb võidelda oma õiguste ja iseseisvuse eest; d) tuleb vastu seista venestamisele, oma maa koloniseerimisele; e) tuleb toetada Soomet, et Karjala vabastataks bolševike ikke alt; f) tuleb alustada ettevalmistavaid töid, organiseeruda ja välja astuda Punaarmee tagalas, mida Soome toetab dessandiga.

Aleksander Põrk olla Gerdile sisendanud, et tuleb ühendada kõik põhjapoolsed „soome rahvad“ Baltikumist Jenisseini, eralduda NSV Liidust, luua Soome Rahvaste Liit, võidelda venestamise ja kolonisaatoritega, hoida kultuuri ja majanduse arengus eesti-soome orientatsiooni, nõuda võrdõiguslikust teiste suuremate NSV Liidu rahvastega jm. Lõpuks kirjutas ta oma tunnistusele ka alla. Kokku arreteeriti SOFINi kohtuasjas 26 udmurti, 1 venelane, 1 mordvalane ja 2 komi. Eelkõige oli tegemist udmurdi rahvusliku eliidiga. Maha lasti neist 1937 tantin Jakovlev, Ivan Burdjukov ja Mihaasta novembris neli: Kuzebai Gerd, Konstantin Jakovlev, Ivan Burdjukov ja Mihhail Timašev, lisaks mordvalane Mihhail Markelov. Nad kõik olid väljapaistvad kul-tuuri-ja haridustegelased. Komidest mõisteti SOFINi kohtuasjas süüdi keeleteadlane ja luuletaja Vassili Lõtkin (1895–1981), kes sai karistuseks viis aastat sunnitööd, mida hiljem vähendati kolmele, ning etnograaf Vassili Nalimov (1879–1939), kes suri vanglas. Tänaseid suundumusi Lisaks nendele kohtuasjadele, milles tuleb hästi välja nõukogude võimu suhtumine soome-ugri rahvaste koostöösse, algatati veel tuhandeid kohtuasju, milles soomeugrilaste rahvuslikku intelligentsi natsionalismis süüdistati. Nii represseeriti kogu Mari rahvusteatri trupp, üle 90% mari kirjanikest, kõigi rahvuslike autonoomiate (Karjala, Komi, Mari, Mordva, Udmurdi) juhtkonnad jne. Seega hävitati kogu Venemaa soome-ugri rahvaste esimese põlvkonna rahvuslik intelligents. Aga represseeriti ja deporteeriti ka terveid rahvaid, näiteks ingerisoomlased. Repressioonid lõid sügavad haavad soome-ugri rahvaste rahvusteadvusse, mille mõju ulatub ka kaasaega. Alguse sai rahvuslik hirmutunne, oma rahvusliku kuuluvuse varjamine, rahvuskeele häbenemine ja sügav rahvuslik alaväärsuskompleks. Venemaa soome-ugri rahvaste assimileerimise juured ulatuvad tagasi traagilisse Stalini aega, mida tänapäeval püütakse üha enam helgemates toonides näidata.

On mõneti kummastav, et usk 1930ndatest pärinevasse „soome-ugri rahvaste vandenõuteooriasse“ pole ka tänapäeval kuhugi kadunud. Teemaarendused minevikust väga ei erine, kuid õnneks ei järgne jõhkraid repressioone. Näiteks 2013. aasta lõpus ilmus Venemaa Strateegiliste Uuringute Instituudi ajakirjas Проблемы Национальной Стратегииkirjutis „Natsionaalseparatism soomeugri vabariikides ja välisfaktor“. Kirjutajaks instituudi teaduslik töötaja Vassili Ivanov. Ta väidab, et „soome-ugri kaart“ ongi sellepärast tekkinud, et Lääs saaks väidetavat soome-ugri rahvaste vägivaldset assimileerimist Venemaa vastu ära kasutada, sellega Venemaad survestada. Miks on Lääne tähelepanu soome-ugri regioonidel? Seepärast, et just seal asuvad Venemaa sõjatööstuskompleksid, samuti on seal palju maavarasid. Separatism seisnevat selles, et soome-ugri rahvaste rahvuslikud liidrid soovivad saavutada vabariikide iseseisvust, lootes luua Euroopa Liiduga seotud konföderatsiooni. Idee soome-ugri maailma keelelisest ja kultuurilisest ühtsusest ning veresugulusest eestlaste, soomlaste ja ungarlastega kannab russofoobset, venevastast iseloomu. Soome-ugri separatismist kõneleb ka tõik, et kohalikud juhid on Eesti, Soome ja Ungari suhtes sõbralikult meelestatud, kuigi Venemaal nende riikidega sõbralikke suhteid pole. Eelkõige ei meeldi autorile mõtted sellistest soome-ugri üritustest, mis võiksid kuidagi neid rahvaid ühendada. Hõimupäeva idee on Venemaa jaoks halb, sest see loovat soomeugrilaste ja teiste Venemaa rahvaste vahele barjääri; soome-ugri rahvaste noorteühendus on halb, sest sealt tuli soome-ugri kultuuripealinna idee, pealegi tegeldakse seal „soome-ugri lipu lehvitamisega“; üldse on soome-ugri identiteet halb, sest murendab Venemaa ühtsust − nii kistavat soome-ugri rahvad Vene Föderatsiooni ühtsest kultuuriruumist välja. 2014. aasta oktoobri intervjuus „Millest võib Eesti ilma jääda skandaali tõttu akadeemik Tiškoviga“ ütleb akadeemik Tiškov meie etnograafi de kohta: „Nad liiguvad kõikjal Venemaal ja kirjutavad rohkelt rumalusi.“ Kuid see on ainult pool häda. Edasi jätkab autor Igor Šisko, kes kirjutab nagu 1930ndatel (Soome asemele on nüüd USA): „Probleem on, et Eesti teadusest, mis uurib soome-ugri rahvaid, on saanud Eesti riigi Venemaa vastase välispoliitika instrument. Toetades Eesti kaudu Venemaa soome-ugri rahvaid, püüab USA tegelikult Venemaad välispoliitiliselt survestada. „Tagakiusatud rahvaid“ toetades soovib USA tegelikult Venemaa kodanikkonda lõhestada.“ 2016. aasta veebruaris ÜROs välja kuulutatud põlisrahvaste keelte päevale pühendatud ja rahvusvähemuste probleeme kajastaval nõupidamisel ütles Venemaa riigiduuma endine esimees Sergei Narõškin, et udmurdi keelt ja kirjandust ei toetata mitte Eesti rahadest, vaid rahastus tuleb teistest riikidest. See oli vastus udmurdi poeedile Aleksei Arzamazovile, kes rääkis Eesti toetusest ja sellest, et Venemaa ise kahjuks udmurdi kirjandust piisavalt ei toeta. 2017. aasta novembris kirjutas aga Olga Derkel ajakirjas Ритм Евразии ilmunud artiklis „Mis on Lääne huvi taga Venemaa põhjarahvaste vastu?“, et

Läänes tegeleb kümneid fonde ja organisatsioone, kes soovivad muuta sealsete kodanike identiteeti. Üks neist on Fenno-Ugria Asutus, kes sekkuvat Venemaa asjadesse ja provotseerivat Venemaa territooriumil etnilist separatismi. Ka siin räägitakse „suurest soome-ugri ideest“, mille teostamiseks olevatki Fenno-Ugria Asutus loodud. Lõpuks keskendub artikkel sellele, kuidas soome-ugri rahvad muutuvat USA kolooniaks ja kuidas Läänes on juba loodud programmid, mis lõhuvad Venemaa kodanikuühiskonna ja siis juba Venemaa tervikuna. Selliste teooriate hulka kuuluvad ka avaldused, et kui vadjalased ja isurid ütlevad midagi Laugasuu (Ust-Luga) sadamaehitiste või handid-mansid gaasi- ja naftatööstuse arendamise kohta oma pühakohtades, siis muutuvad nad koheselt eestlaste „käsilasteks“, kellel on teadagi omad majandushuvi, mis ei lähtu mitte põlisrahvaste huvidest, vaid teenivad ikka USAd. Need on vaid mõned näited, mis meenutavad aastaid 1937−1938. On möödunud mitu inimpõlve, aga üks suurriik näeb oma väikerahvastes endiselt vaid ohtu, selmet näha rikkust ja tunda nende üle uhkust. Artikli ajalooline osa tugineb Kuzma Kulikovi raamatul „Дело „СОФИН““ (Iževsk, 1997). Jaak Prozes on ajaloolane (MA), Fenno-Ugria Asutuse taasasutaja ja töötaja, kes jälgib muu hulgas ka soome-ugri rahvaste asualadel toimuvaid ühiskondlik-poliitilisi ning kultuurilisi arenguid.

80 plundered shrines

The collection provides an overview of ancient shrines plundering.
The collection is non-exhaustive.
The collection includes some 80 characteristic examples of the condition of heritage and shrines under nature protection by the State, also examples of cultural heritage and cross-trees map publicised shrines. 
The Collections objective is to give an objective opinion of our landscapes and peoples culture characteristics and to help protect their condition.

UNPROTECTED PLACES
Some up to 4000 natural shrines places have not been registered. In causal effect the protection of them is not possible to warrant. Many of the shrines are known and used.

 

Read on all the 80 plundered places: 

http://hiis.ee/files/ryystatud_pyhapaigad_2018.pdf

As example –
Põlva parish Taevaskoja (“Heaven-Chambers”) shrine
Landscape Reserve of the Valley of the Ahja River (KLO1000452),
Place of Heritage Culture Taevaskoda 619: HII: 006
Põlva v., Taevaskoja k, Kiidjärve forest district 82 c. (lot: 61901: 001: 0124).

2011-2012 At RMK’s (Estonian National Forest Centre) request, old and new tourist infrastructure (stairs, railings, roads) was renovated in Taevaskoja, which significantly altered and damaged the environment and sanctuary.

The stairs and borders of post-guard were recessed and grounded with a soil drill, and it was also made right next to the Mother Fountain Cave (Emalätte koobas). At the same time, RMK was aware of the risk of collapse of the cave because it has placed an informative sign of “collapse warning” directly on the cave. For the construction of sidewalks, 1900 tons of crushed stone were transported on heavy machines. “The Guardians” of the Sanctuary were essentially not included in the the planning and execution of the works.

During the works, the site of 1st Category Protected plants was damaged. “Directly for reconditioning responsible Aigar Kallas, Chairman of the Management Board of RMK, and the Environmental Board Director General Andres Onemar approved the construction project, and later acknowledged that “what happened was a painful lesson, that will require to make conclusions to prevent such things in the future. ”(EPL 30.11.12)

When the Cave of Mother Fountain collapsed 2013, RMK denied causal effect with the works conducted. Rein Einasto, Professor of Geology, having viewed the site considered the main cause of the collapse the construction works beside the cave. He also considered such extensive construction of stairs and handrails in the nature reserve and a sacred place a useless and regrettable violation of nature.

The cost of the construction project in Taevaskoja was 227,387 euros.

RMK organizes lawn mowing every summer in Taevaskoja, notwithstanding that it reduces species diversity, pollutes the environment with sound and air pollution, and disturbs the peace of the sanctuary.

Owner: State of Estonia – RMK (National Forest Centre)

Read articles: – Builders hammered up Taevaskoja’s protected area: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]

UN: Nordic-Baltic Statement on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

The Nordic-Baltic countries strongly support the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), including its emphasis on the right to self-government and participation. These are central to ensure that the rights of indigenous peoples are respected.

Looking ahead to the next decade it is clear that more attention could be given to enhancing the interplay and cross-fertilization between UNDRIP and existing human rights mechanisms. We therefore encourage States to include UNDRIP within the framework of the UPR.

Read more: https://www.norway.no/en/missions/wto-un/nig/statements/hr/hrc/hrc36/nordic-baltic-statement/