>From: "Grant Lee" <grantlee at iinet.net.au>
>Would I be right in thinking that these are concentrated are in remote
>regions which were barely touched by Soviet modernisation, etc?
Not necessarily. Chuvashia, Tatarstan and Bashkortostan (home to the Chuvash, Tatars and Bashkir, respectively) are developed areas. Tatarstan is the third-richest region in Russia.
As an instance of intra-ethnic conflict, I give the case of Bashkortostan. The Bashkir nationalists are trying to Bashkirize the educational system and media, much to the dismay of the Russians and Tatars living there. (There are actually more Tatars and Russians in Bashkortostan as a percentage of the population than there are Bashkirs.) Bashkir nationalists sometimes claim that the Bashkirs share a common herotage with the British, of all things.
By the way, Lenin was part Chuvash (and looks it), something Chuvash natuonalists are fond of pointing out.
When the Russian Empre expanded to the east and south, it swallowed up a huge number of native peoples but didn't much try to asismilate them, basically left them alone and exacted tribute from them. Much like the Roman Empire. Modern Russia is still characterized by this loose arrangement (today, it's not tribute that is being exacted, but taxes and votes).
The Chukchi in Siberia still herd reindeer, you know. As an aside, it is because of the traditional religions of the Siberian peoples that animism is an official Russian religion with state sanction (unlike, say, Catholicism).
This country really hasn't changed much since Lermontov's time. The Cossaks are still hanging out in the Caucasus defending Mother Russia's borders. BTW they do look damn impressive on their horses -- you look at a Cossak and the first thing you think is "I do not want to fuck with that guy."
_________________________________________________________________ Enter for your chance to IM with Bon Jovi, Seal, Bow Wow, or Mary J Blige using MSN Messenger http://entertainment.msn.com/imastar