Семья аборигенов как основа социальной организации коренных народов Дальнего Востока в середине Х1Х – начале ХХ вв.

Oleg Alekseevich Vasil’chenko – Doctor of History, docent, professor of the chair “Social work” of the Komsomol’sk-on-Amur State Technical University (Komsomol’sk-on-Amur). E-mail: SFknagtu@mail.ru

The family of natives as a basis of the social organization of radical people of the Far East in the middle of XIX – the beginning of XX century

In this article the character of intra-family relations of aboriginals of the Far East are resulted. The reasons of wide circulation of various forms of polygamy are considered. The features of man's and female labor activity in the family economy are analyzed.

Keywords: family, the Far East, natives, history, the social organization.

Long before occurrence of the Russian immigrants the territory of the Far East was populated by radical people – koryaks, eskimos and other representatives of the native population.

Between representatives of the native population there were the complex ethno-cultural contacts which arisen during their centuries-old existence and have generated similar forms of family-marriage attitudes, close or similar ways of conducting housekeeping.

The basis of economic and public life of natives was patriarchal-family unit.

The greater patriarchal family consisted of parents and their married sons or several brothers with families. Together with them aged relatives or orphans - children of the lost relatives lived. For example, among gol’ds there were the families totaled up to 25 people and lived in one fanza [1].

The father was considered as the head of the family. After his death – his senior son. If he died, the head of the family became a brother following it. Among women dominating position was borrowed usually with mother or the wife of the senior brother.

Alongside with greater families there were also small families. So, in the beginning of XX century the average size of families natives was made by 5,5 person [2].

Among radical people of Priamur’e have received a wide circulation various forms of polygamy – levirat, sororat and polygamy [3].

Levirat had an economic and moral and psychological basis (protection of interests of widows and children).

The destruction of the man on hunting or for other reasons was the frequent phenomenon. The widow who remained with children, required protection and the help. The younger brother of the victim or the younger cousin, sometimes the nephew of the late took the widow to himself as a wife [4].

Sororat has economic interests. It allowed to a widower to receive mother for children and the wife without payment of the bride money. The widower should marry the unmarried younger sister, the younger cousin or the niece of died wife. The customs forbade marriages of widowers and widows with the senior relatives of the latter of the wife or the husband.

Polygamy in the environment of indigenous population of the Far East had some reasons: sometimes the old wife asked herself to result in the house the young wife for the help in charge of economy; often took the second wife in the case of childlessness of the first. Polygamy for natives was a parameter of well-being and a criterion of riches.

At all similarity of family customs and traditions, they necessarily bore in themselves the ethnic specificity peculiar to each people. Social development was characterized by use of various forms of family-marriage attitudes.

For example, among aleuts group forms of marriage were kept still. According to norms of group marriage, the man could live with all wives of the senior brothers and with all sisters of the wife. Thus the senior brother had no right to wives of younger brothers. The sexual life was supposed strictly for representatives of one generation and has been forbidden between representatives of different generations.

With the development of reindeer breeding, isolation of economies, group marriage gradually regenerated in company on the wife. The man gave the wife for some time to another man, and then she came back. So friendly relations by the men were fixed. By many people of the Priamursk territory the group marriage accompanied pair marriage.

Aboriginals are difficult for accusing of immorality. They lived under other laws which are distinct from accepted among immigrants from the European Russia. So, in close ярангах чукчей some married couples huddled. They easy concerned to publicity of the sexual life. N.O. Kallinikov studied a life and customs of radical people of northeast of Russian empire, wrote about chukcha: «Prostitution in the European sense of a word between chukcha is not present, there is no also a jealousy. They look at satisfaction of sexual feeling as on simple satisfaction of human needs of nature» [5].

The major principle in family-marriage relations of natives was the aspiration to exogamy, i.e. to restriction of the matrimonial union on a degree of relationship. So, nivhi aspired to take wives not from that sort where gave the women, and from another. It promoted that each sort appeared connected related узами at least with two sorts. Nivhi preferred to marry women from a sort of mother. Evenki’s marriage also carried exogamous character. It was resolved between the persons carried one patrimonial name, 7-10 generations are not closer.

The observance of exogamous norms had positive character as interfered with the conclusion of marriages among close relatives, that the sort done not endanger degeneration through the certain quantity of generations.

Different people had various ways of purchase of wives. For example, at эвенков the most ancient way there was a war. Wives became women won, and also the women who have been given out for reconciliation.

Besides the exchange marriage between two families was extended. From the economic point of view the exchange was favorable, as payment of dear bride money and given to wedding was not required. Fine gifts prepared only.

At all people of Far East region of Russia the conclusion of early marriages practiced. Parents agreed and on arrangement married juvenile or even children who have not born yet [6]. The arrangements of parents were peculiar to all radical people of the Far East and were a parameter of care of parents in the decision of the major question on the future of home life of children. At achievement of age of consent the contract was realized. On the first place at the conclusion of marriages always there were reasons of the economic order. Personal feelings of the groom or the bride faded into the background.

Gilaki and Goldy practiced to marry juvenile girls of 8-12 years, chukchi – 5-7 years. Girls settled in families of husbands, began a marriage life on achievement of a sexual maturity. Sometimes children named by the husband and the wife, remained in the families before a sexual maturity. They reached age of the groom and the bride approximately in 14-16 years.

Early marriage is for that the woman for the life could give birth to more children. Not last role purchase for family of new relatives and played reception of the bride money.

The shortage of brides caused by polygamy and high death rate from illnesses and at sorts was observed. Therefore a question on the future bride rose before parents even at achievement by the son 4-5 years age.

Obstacle for the conclusion of marriages was necessity of payment by the groom of the big bride money. The payment for the bride should replace work of the leaving woman. For example, гольд an average prosperity paid for the wife on the average about 250 rubles in money; gave 2 greater pig-iron boilers and 10 pieces of a matter [1. P.149]. Use of the bride money in family-marriage attitudes of natives had negative consequences as its gathering needed time. The needy could not pay bride money, therefore for them the opportunity to receive the wife was excluded.

To many people of Priamursk territory marriage by working off of the bride was known. The man, wished to marry, some time worked in the house of parents of the bride. It was entrusted with the performance of the heaviest works. It proved the skill in affairs of hunting and economic. In case of failure in it this field refusal from parents of the bride waited. By evenki the term of working off changed from 1,5 till 3th years, by koryaks – sometimes till 5 years. If the groom met all requirements of family of the bride received from the head of the family the consent to marriage. Marriage was valid only after the termination of working off for the bride.

Mutual relations of spouses were regulated by a common law.

By golds the woman was an essence the lowest by the nature. To talk and consult on the woman was considered humiliating for men. They could not take part in collective conversation, could not sit down meal together with men and ate only after them.

There were relations between men and women by koryaks. The wife had the right of voice in the decision of family questions. Beating of the wife was a unusual occurrence. Even women were under protection of the relatives. Having many children mother used greater honor. After death of the husband it could become the head of the family.

In chukchi families the woman also played the important role at decision-making. If the owner was absent, the dominating role in family was played by its wife.

At all difficulty and complexity of position of married women, she could return to relatives, i.e. there was a divorce as a way of divorce. By koryaks divorces were made as under the initiative of the husband, and the wife. An occasion the immoral behavior of the wife, the bad reference of the husband or its relatives, disorder could serve as the wife of housekeeping. In gold’s family mother of the bride a vein first two weeks in the house of groom together with the daughter. If the reference with the daughter from make related the husband was bad then it was terminated.

Residing of radical people of Russia by greater patriarchal families was supported by observance of strictly regulated intra-family attitudes. There was a division of economic activities of family into man's and female works.

Labor employment of men depends on a kind of primary activity (fishery, hunting or reindeer breeding). Preparation of fire wood and exchange operations concerned to man's employment.

Female work in family of natives was not less important, than man's. The woman was engaged in cooking, care of children, manufacture of skins, manufacturing of economic utensils and clothes. At nomadic people of the woman level with men looked after deer and drove caravans. They contained the center and dwelling.

Women and girls by evenki traded a fur animal. Koryak women completely performed all works on cutting and drying of a fish on crafts. They also processed ink of the killed sea animals.

Gathering concerned to purely female employment nuts, berries and sea molluscs.

At radical people child labor was widely used. From early age children started to perform feasible work for them. Under direction of the senior members of family they gradually got necessary economic skills.

Under influence of economic development of region to the beginning of XX century representation about spheres of man's and female work of natives has changed.

Having kept in a basis former facilities, natives-men to some extent (depending on a nomadic or settled way of life) were accustomed to new kinds of labor activity.

Radically employment of men has changed at the settled people which was joint residing with immigrants and have appeared in a greater degree in a floor of interests of imperial authorities.

The head of the family acted as the head and the organizer of family manufacture, defined at own discretion actions of all members of family at the decision of economic problems. Decisions of the chapter leaned on century traditions, norms of a common law and a rule of residing of members of family and close relatives.

Mutual relations between relatives have been based on mutual aid. Each family was the active participant in activity of a community, whether it was hunting, protection against enemies or cult ceremonies.

Generalizing the characteristic of intra-family attitudes of radical people of the Far East in second half XIX - the beginning of XX century, it is possible will allocate positions:

- Basic structural unit of a social order of natives of the Russian Far East was patriarchal-family unit (patriarchal family), that polygamy served as the reason of preservation of vestiges of group marriage, levirat, sororat, etc.

- In the end of XIX century the facilities of family of natives was natural. Under influence of social and economic development of region as a result of its colonization in economic activities of radical people there were appreciable changes. Occurrence of commodity-money attitudes promoted the further decomposition is patriarchal-patrimonial building. The family has ceased to carry out a role of the basic industrial cell that has led to change of intra-family attitudes, has weakened dependence of women on men.

- The leading tendency in family-marriage attitudes of radical people became constant reduction of number of not divided families and increase in number small. It promoted reduction of influence by members of family of existed stereotypes of gender mutual relations which took root in greater patriarchal families.

- Involving of the half-natural economy of natives in commodity-money relations promoted the destruction of primitive isolation and isolatedness of radical people, rapprochement of their culture with the culture of Slavic people. It has affected intra-family attitudes between men and women. Aboriginals of the Far East had an opportunity to get acquainted with this party of home life of East-Slavic population of the region which gender relations on higher level of development.

Literature and the sources:

1. I. A. Lopatin. Goldy. – Vladivostok, 1922. – P. 168 ; P. 149.

2. The Russian state historical archive of the Far East (RSHAFS). – F. 702. – Op. 1. – D. 568. – P. 2.

3. RSHAFS. – F. 702. – Op. 1. – D. 430. – P. 5.

4. M. I. Venyukov. Journey to the Amur region, China and Japan. – Khabarovsk, 1970. – P. 109.

5. N. O. Kallinikov. Extreme Northeast. – SPb., 1912. – P. 84.

6. RSHAFS. – F. 702. – Op. 3. – D. 310. – L. 75.