EARLY STAGES OF PATERNALISTIC MULTICULTURAL POLICY IN YAKUTIA
The article considers the early experience of ethno-confessional policy towards Yakuts (1632-1769). The author first reviewed features of this policy and the stages of its development. Based on the theory of multiculturalism, a thesis about the nature of the administration of paternalistic management in Yakutia has been developed. The incipient conflict was resolved in a timely manner by a weakening of the yasak régime and in agreements with representatives of Yakutia’s élites, namely chiefs, that gave them authority over the administration of their lands. Government at a very early time understood the importance of cultural dialogue with the peoples included in the composition of the Russian state and took steps towards the initiation to the all-Russian cultural values in particular by spreading education among them. The article discusses features of ethno-confessional policy of the Moscow government in Yakutia in the 17th century: the relationship between the state and the elite of the Yakut society, the further development of the yasak administrative system, and some ethno-cultural features of that policy in relation to the Yakuts. The author has traced specific facts illustrating how the crisis that occurred in the conduct of this policy was orvercome, particularly in the period of Petrine reforms. For the first time attention is drawn to the “project” of conflict resolution over the period of the mid-18th century as an effective means of ethno-confessional policy. Projects to improve the management of Yakuts, tribute collection, public service obligations were established by officials, exiled courtiers, and Yakut chiefs. The information contained in these ideas had accumulated and specific laws had developed. In conclusion, the author identified the most important features of the early period of ethno-confessional policy of the Russian state in Yakutia: flexible forms of administrative-territorial, non-interference in the domestic life of Yakuts, involvement of the local elite in public administration, willingness to resolve conflicts through peaceful means where military methods were ineffective, and toleration. Refs 35.