Dear Mr. Chairman,
ladies and gentlemen,

25 years ago I had the honour to address you for the first time and show you in Tallinn my first and recent film shots about the Mari, Komi and Khanty people. That footage laid the foundation for the film The Waterfowl People and I would like to thank you, especially the late academician Kustaa Vilkuna, for the unanimous and warm support which this film and the following ones received in Finland, Estonia and Hungary at that time and later. Today it would be proper to confess to you that those film documents, which broke themselves through the iron curtain, did not ever receive a permission to be released in the Soviet Union. They were forbidden in the Soviet Union, but allowed in Estonia. This reminds me of Tartu Peace Treaty, which strengthened and shaped the Estonian national identity into something so self-evident that the Soviet occupation regime just had to consider it.

That was a different world, another time and another country not existing any more. But the issues, which arose at that time, still exist. These are simple and, therefore, fundamental issues. Fundamental not only for Finno-Ugric linguists but also for the world peace and stability, international organisations and the European Union, the member of which to our great delight Finland is already and the members of which to the delight of the Finnish people Estonia and Hungary will most likely become pretty soon.

Whether you like it or not, whether you admit it or not, but this way or another you will discuss today and the following days national identities.

Identities of small nations.

You will discuss differences and common features of Finno-Ugric and Samoyedic languages, beliefs, social structures, customs, songs, the unwritten literature if we use the title of the book by Matti Kuusi, which has always fascinated me because these two words of the title contain a research programme for several decades.

I have to admit that during the recent years I have met more politicians than scientists and discussed mostly common values for Europe. But I have considered it self-evident that while studying and trying to understand the European phenomenon, one has to prefer microscope to telescope and leave aside the periscope of the times of The Waterfowl People. I think that European phenomenon is also the fact that on this small peninsular, which I have compared to the tip of the tail of the Eurasian horse, national identities could have survived, developed and deepened not aggressively at each
other' s cost, but friendly supporting each other.

There are more germanies and frances in Germany and France now than at Bismarck's time. Democratic co-existence of big and small cultures is the precondition for the co-existence of different frames of mind and cultures. Cultural differences, in their turn, are the power supporting and increasing creativity, both humanitarian and technological. The more the bolts, crews and gas stations are standardised, the more time and creativity is saved for deepening national identity and strengthening the diversity of creativeness. Diversity, in its turn, consolidates equality, democracy and stability.

This was not possible under the conditions of a colonial empire, but it is our common responsibility at the time when colonial empires fall and democratic structures are developed. After the Ottomans, Hohenzollerns and Habsburgs we were witnessing how the last colonial state - the Romanovs' empire modernised into the Soviet Union - collapsed. This is where our responsibilities arise from and they are totally different from the romantic kindred peoples movement of the beginning of the century. We have to understand that due to the geographical position the colonial policy in the former Russian Empire was pursued totally different from that of Great Britain, Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Netherlands or other colonial states. Instead of the navy, the Russian colonial empire used russification and the missionary work of the Russian orthodox church in order to enforce its power. The axe edge cut the roots of national identity, not the tops. Out of the 23 Uralic peoples only three have been able to establish their own states. Current social expectations of the Finno-Ugric people living in the Russian Federation can be compared to the feelings of national awakening among Estonians, Finns and Hungarians during the last century. They are looking at us. We have academic and even political responsibility to meet their expectations. I would be very grateful to the Congress should the first step towards the goal be to unite the forces of Estonians, Finns and Hungarians in order to establish Finno-Ugric cultural centres in Yoschkar-Ola, Syktyvkar and Hanty-Mansiisk. This way we would fulfil the wish expressed by a local man of learning and fixed by Castrèn in his diary. We would help to re-establish the blood circulation of post-Russification culture at least in places where it is still possible. Russia has been and will always be the neighbouring country of Finland and Estonia. It is important for us how Russia treats its minorities, how it orientates itself towards the European frame of mind. I do hope that we can continue a positive discussion of these issues in Tartu in the year 2OOO. In the present year of the academician Paul Ariste it is my pleasure and honour to assure you that you are all cordially welcome to our 9th congress in Tartu - Paul Ariste's home town.

back | archive of speeches | main page