1. The term “Sctumaa” refers to the land of the Setus, the area where Setus live, now divided between Estonia and Russia.Google Scholar

2. The central terms used in this paper have to be defined. For “ethnic group” I proceeded from Fredrik Barth's classic definition: “The term ethnic group is generally understood in anthropological literature to designate a population which: 1. is largely biologically self-perpetuating; 2. shares fundamental cultural values, realized in overt unity in cultural forms; 3. makes up a field of communication and interaction; 4. has a membership which identifies itself, and is identified by others, as constituting a category distinguishable from other categories of the same order.” Barth, “Introduction,” in Barth, ed., Ethnic Croups and Boundaries. The Social Organization of Culture Difference (Boston: Little, Brown, 1969), pp. 10–11. The concept “nation” is used according to the following definition: “A modern nation may be defined as a territorially-based community of human beings sharing a distinct variant of modern culture, bound together by a strong sentiment of unity and solidarity, marked by a clear historically-rooted consciousness of national identity, and possessing, or striving to possess, a genuine political self-government.” Konstantin Symmons-Symonolewicz, “The Concept of Nationhood: Toward a Theoretical Clarification,” Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism, Vol. 12, No. 2, 1985, p. 221. The main feature differentiating nation and ethnic group is that, unlike an ethnic group, a nation is in close relation to modern society, has a national written language and is characterized by a political dimension (striving for a nation state or at least for political autonomy). I employ the term “ethnic identity” to represent the feeling of solidarity or oneness with one's ethnic group, defining oneself as a member of a certain ethnic group. Ethnic identity forms as a result of both self-identification and ascription. Self-identification is in complex mutual relation with identification by others. See Georg Elwert, “Nationalismus und Ethnizität: Über die Bildung von Wir-Gruppen,” Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, Vol. 41, No. 3, 1989, pp. 440–463. It seems that ascription has played a primary role in the development of the Setu ethnic identity.Google Scholar

3. This part of the article is based mainly on the following texts: Willem Buck, Petseri eestlased (Tartu: Postimees, 1908); Paul Hagu, “Setude etnogenees agraartavandi valgusel”, Keel ja Kirjandus, Vol. 21, No. 10, 1978, pp. 616–623; Paul Hagu, “Setukaisten identiteetin ongelmat,” in Tuija Saarinen and Seppo Suhonen, eds, Koltat, karjalaiset ja setukaiset. Pienet kansat maailmojen rajoilla (Kuopio: Snellmann-Instituutti, 1995), pp. 169–181; Oskar Kallas, “Einiges über die Setud,” in Sitzungsberichte der Gelehrten Estnischen Gesellschaft 1894 (Dorpat: Gelehrte Estnische Gesellscaft, 1895), pp. 81–105; Oskar Loorits, “About the Religious Concretism of the Setukesians,” Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Aikakauskirja, Vol. 61, No. 5, 1959, pp. 1–49; Toivo U. Raun, “The Petseri Region of the Republic of Estonia,” Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, Vol. 39, No. 4, pp. 514–532; Leo Reissar, Setumaa läbi sajandite. Petserimaa (Tallinn: Kupar, 1996); Elizaveta Rikhter, “Integratsiia setu s estonskoi natsiei,” in Eesti talurahva majanduse ja olme arengujooni 19. ja 20. sajandil (Tallinn: Eesti NSV Teaduste Akadeemia Ajaloo Instituut, 1979), pp. 90–119; Kto i kak zhil na zemle Estonii. Etnograficheskie ocherki (Tallinn: Akeksandra, 1996); Jakob Hurt, Setukeste laulud. Pihkva-Eestlaste vanad rahvalaulud, ühes Räpina ja Vastseliina lauludega, Vol. 1 (Helsingi: Soome Kirjanduze Selts, 1904); Juri Trusman, “Poluvertsy Pskovo-Pechorskogo kraia,” Zhivaia starina, No. 1, 1890, pp. 31–62; Juri Trusman, “O proiskhozhdenie Pskovo-Pechorskikh poluvertsev,” Zhivaia starina, No. 1, 1897, pp. 37–47.Google Scholar

4. Russian census, 1897.Google Scholar

5. Literacy among the Setus was only 8% in 1897 according to the First All-Russian census.Google Scholar

6. A priest, Mutovozov from Petseri, reported only two Setu–Russian marriages during 23 years of service in his 300-soul congregation. See Friedrich-Eugen Paas, Sega-abielud ja nende mōju rahvusele piiriäärsetes maakondades Eestis. Auhinnatöö (Tartu: 1927), p. 23.Google Scholar

7. See Buck, op. cit., p. 4; Daniel Palgi, Murduvas maailmas. Mälestusi (Tallinn: Perioodika, 1994), p. 13. As examples of “Setu books,” see Hermann-Julius Schmalz, Alatarõ Hippo Peterbuura reis ja imelik unōnägo inne toda (Jurjew: H. J. Schmalz, 1901); Hermann-Julius Schmalz, Töganitsa Höödo naisevõtmise ja tarõ palamise lugu (Jurjew: H. J. Schmalz, 1902).Google Scholar

8. The term “Setu” occurs in literature for the first time in 1860 (in “Neuhausen und die Pleskauschen Esten,” Das Inland, No. 34, 1860, pp. 625–630). The etymology of this ethnonym is not clear. The most reliable hypothesis has been that of Estonian linguist Julius Mägiste. In his opinion, the ethnonym goes back to the fact that the Setu equivalent to the Estonian word see (it, this) is settu. Similar pejorative regional nicknames that are based on small differences in speech are known from South Estonia too, but have disappeared from use. See Julius Mägiste, “Setude nimetusest,” Tulimuld, No. 5, 1957, p. 248. 9. See for example Jakob Hurt, op. cit., p. v.Google Scholar

10. Orvar Löfgren, “The Nationalization of the Culture,” Eihnologia Europaea, Vol. 19, 1989, pp. 10–11; Rein Taagepera, The Finno-Ugric Republics and the Russian State (London: Hurst, 1999), pp. 111–112. 11. See Juri Trusman, “Poluvertsy Pskovo-Pechorskogo kraia,” p. 48; Viktor Reier, “Mälestused Setumaalt,” Eesti Kirjandus, No. 5, 1922, p. 174. The pre-nationalism era offers many examples of ethnic identity being dominated by religious identity, and loyalty to the state connected with this. For example, Lutheran Finns considered themselves Swedes and Orthodox Karelians considered themselves Russians. See Taagepera, op. cit., p. 100. Catholicism was regarded as Polish and Orthodoxy as the Russian faith in Belarus. Accordingly, many Catholic Belarussians considered themselves Polish and the Orthodox considered themselves Russians. See Narody Evropeiskoi chasti SSSR, Vol. 1 (Moscow: Izdatel'stvo “Nauka,” 1964), p. 781. 12. This part of the article is based mainly on the following texts: Hagu, “Setukaisten identiteetin ongelmat;” Aare Hõrn, “Setukaisten ortodoksisuus ennen ja nyt,” in Tuija Saarinen and Seppo Suhonen, eds, Koltat, karjalaiset ja setukaiset. Pienet kansat maailmojen rajoilla (Kuopio: Snellmann-Instituutti, 1995), pp. 182–188; Loorits, op. cit.; Evald Markus, “Changes of the Esto-Russian Ethnographical Frontier in Petserimaa,” in 'Õpetatud Eesti Seltsi Aastaraamat 1936 (Tartu: $Onpetatud Eesti Selts, 1937), pp. 164–176; Edgar Mattisen, Eesti-Vene piir (Tallinn: Ilo, 1993); Raun, op. cit.; Reissar, op. cit.; Rikhter, “Integratsiia setu s estonskoi natsiei;” Rikhter, Kto i kak zhil na zemle Estonii. 13. Estonian censuses, 1922, 1934.Google Scholar

14. Setu–Russian mixed marriages were studied by Friedrich-Eugen Paas in the middle of the 1920s. With the help of local officials he could find only 49 Setu–Russian families in Petseri county (excluding the town of Petseri). The rate of these marriages was low due to the strong ethnic self-consciousness on both sides, but also because of the language barrier. See Paas, op. cit., pp. 3–27.Google Scholar

15. There are many parallels between integrating Petseri county into the Estonian Republic and integrating Latgale into the Latvian Republic. Latgale, too, had been separated from the rest of Latvia for centuries before it was united with the newly founded Latvian Republic after First World War. The Latgals were Catholic, unlike the Latvians, who were predominantly Lutheran. Infrastructure and social life in Latgale were underdeveloped compared with the rest of Latvia. The educational level of the local people remained below the Latvian average. But there are also differences between Latgale and Petseri regions. The area of Latgale is much bigger and the population of Latgals (350,000) greatly surpasses that of the Setus. There is also a difference in faith—Catholicism favored popular education more than Orthodoxy did, and literacy among the Latgals reached 47–51% at the end of Tsarist rule. Thanks to these circumstances there were enough educated Latgals who could stand up for Latgal interests. Thus, the Latgals, unlike the Setus, had an educated elite, and the Latgal dialect had a much stronger position in Latgale than the Setu dialect had in the Petseri region. The Latgal dialect was recognized as an official language in Latgale in 1921, and Latgal literature was published. The Catholic church was politically active, and politicians from Latgale took part in Latvian political life. Unlike Petseri county, Latgale had a distinct, though not dominating, separatist movement led by Francis Kemps, based on local religious, linguistic and cultural peculiarities. See S. Kuznetsov, “Latgale, ‘tretia zvezda,‘ ” in I. Sheiman and S. Kuznetsov, Nezavisimaia Latvia 1918–1940 (Riga: SI, 1996), pp. 170–187.Google Scholar

16. Elizaveta Rikhter, “Integratsiia setu s estonskoi natsiei,” pp.95, 105; Raun, op. cit., p.531; Paas, op. cit., pp. 8–9.Google Scholar

17. “Sety zhalyutsya na pritesnenia tshinimyia estontsami,” Vesti dnia, 19 July 1933.Google Scholar

18. Reissar, op. cit., p. 169.Google Scholar

19. This part of the article is based mainly on the following texts: “Dokumente Petseri- ja Virumaa jaotamise kohta,” Akadeemia, Vol. 3, No. 8, 1991; Hagu, “Setukaisten identiteetin ongelmat;” Hõrn, op. cit.; Reissar, op. cit.; Rikhter, “Integratsiia setu s estonskoi natsiei.”Google Scholar

20. “Dokumente Petseri- ja Virumaa jaotamise kohta,” pp. 1736–1758; Jääts, Setude etniline identiteet (Tartu: 1998), p. 59.Google Scholar

21. See M. L. Zasetskaia, A. G. Novozhilov, I. V. Gromova and S. A. Khrushchev, “Setu. Istorija, kultura, sovremennyie etnitsheskie protsessy,” Istoriko-etnografitsheskie otsherki Pskovskogo kraia (Pskov: Izdatel'stvo Pskovskogo oblastnogo instituta povyshenia kvalifikatsii rabotnikov obrazovania, 1999), p. 286.Google Scholar

22. Rikhter, “Integratsiia setu s estonskoi natsiei,” p. 97.Google Scholar

23. The Russian ethnographer Elizaveta Rikhter studied the ethnic processes in Setumaa during the 1960–1970s according to the Soviet theory of ethnos.Google Scholar

24. Paul Hagu, “Setude etnogenees agraartavandi valgusel,” p. 616.Google Scholar

25. See Jääts, op. cit., pp. 100–101. These data were collected during ethnological field work in 1996–1997. A total of 133 Setus were questioned in the Estonian and Russian parts of Setumaa and Tartu.Google Scholar

26. Rikhter, “Integratsiia setu s estonskoi natsiei,” pp. 101, 106–107.Google Scholar

27. See Vaike Sarv, “Setukaisten eläva laulu- ja juhlaperinne,” in Tuija Saarinen and Seppo Suhonen, eds, Koltat, karjalaiset ja setukaiset. Pienet kansat maailmojen rajoilla (Kuopio: Snellmann-Instituutti, 1995), pp. 189–199.Google Scholar

28. The problems of mixed marriages have been studied by St Petersburg ethnographers (K. P. Ivanov, S. A. Khrushchev, A. G. Novozhilov) in the 1990s. Studying the materials of the registry office of the Petseri raion, they found that during 1945–1996 633 Setu marriages and 537 Setu–non-Setu (mostly Russian) marriages were registred in the raion (including the town of Petseri). Since the 1960s the Setus married mostly with Russians. The last child in the Petseri raion whose parents are both Setus was born in 1988. See M. L. Zasetskaya, A. G. Novozhilov, J. V. Gromova and S. A. Khrushchev, op. cit., p. 287.Google Scholar

29. Baltic Independent, 9–15 July 1993.Google Scholar

30. Baltic Independent, 24–30 July 1992; Ruslan Ignatyev, Rossiiskaya Gazeta, 14 April 1994.Google Scholar

31. Indrek Jääts, “East of Narva and Petserimaa,” in Tuomas Forsberg, ed., Contested Territory. Border Disputes at the Edge of the Former Soviet Empire (Ipswich, Suffolk: Edward Elgar, 1995), pp. 198–199.Google Scholar

32. See Eesti Entsüklopeedia, Vol. 8 (Tallinn: Eesti Entsüklopeediakirjastus, 1995), p. 457.Google Scholar

33. See home page of the Estonian Foreign Ministry (http://www.vm.ee).Google Scholar

34. Jääts, “East of Narva and Petserimaa,” p. 199.Google Scholar

35. Neljas Seto Kongress 9. oktoobril 1996. a. Värskas (Seto Kongressi Vanernate Kogu, 1997), p. 60.Google Scholar

36. M. L. Zasetskaya, A. G. Novozhilov, J. V. Gromova and S. A. Khrushchev, op. cit., pp. 291–292.Google Scholar

37. Jääts, Setude etniline identiteet, pp. 123–124.Google Scholar

38. Eesti piirkondlik statistika 1995 (Tallinn: Eesti Statistikaamet, 1996), p. 37; Jääts, op. cit., p. 80.Google Scholar

39. Tatiana Maximova, “Identity Options. Setu People in Russia,” in Eiki Berged, ed., Common Border, Shared Problems. Research Reports (Tartu: Lake Peipsi Project, 1997), pp. 62–63; Neljas Seto Kongress 9. oktoobril 1996. a. Värskas, p. 18; Jääts, op. cit., p. 118.Google Scholar

40. Jääts, Setude etniline identiteet, p. 117.Google Scholar

41. I and my colleagues (Pille Runnel, Tatiana Maximova, Elena Nikiforova) studied attitudes towards Estonian–Russian border problems among the inhabitants of the border areas on both sides of the frontier during fieldwork in 1996 and 1997. More than 100 locals, mostly Setus, were questioned. The following part of the article is based mainly on data collected from this fieldwork.Google Scholar

42. Jääts, Setude etniline identiteet, pp. 92–95, 118–120.Google Scholar

43. See Ain Sarv, interview in Postimees, 26 January 2000.Google Scholar

44. Jääts, Setude etniline identiteet, pp. 94–95. See also Anssi Paasi, “Constructing Territories, Boundaries and Regional Identities,” in Forsberg, ed., Contested Territory, p. 55.Google Scholar

45. Maximova, op. cit., pp. 65–68.Google Scholar

46. Neljas Seto Kongress 9. oktoobril 1996. a. Värskas, p. 18.Google Scholar

47. The term “Seto” is equivalent to the Estonian literary language ethnonym “Setu” in Setu dialect. Using the term “Seto” shows that one values the peculiarity of the Setu language and culture.Google Scholar

48. Võrumaa is a historical region in southeastern Estonia adjacent to Setumaa and with a quite similar dialect, but Lutheran.Google Scholar

49. Võro-seto tähtraamat vai kallendri 1995. aastaga pääle (Navi-Võro: Võrovaimu Selc, 1994), pp. 1–3.Google Scholar

50. Tõnu Tender and Enn Kasak, “Võru uuemad kirjaviisid ja Brown(c)'i liikumine,” Keel ja Kirjandus, Vol. 38, No. 9, 1995, pp. 312–319; Võro-seto tähtraamat vai kallendri 1995. aastaga pääle, pp. 1–5.Google Scholar

51. For example, one of the most prominent leaders of the Seto movement is Paul Hagu, a lecturer of folkloristics at Tartu University. One of the most prominent leaders of the Võro movement is Kauksi Ülle, a well-known author and poetess, who writes in the Võro language.Google Scholar

52. Eiki Berg, “National Interests and Local Needs in a Divided Setumaa: Behind the Narratives,” in Heikki Eskelinen, Ilkka Liikanen and Jukka Oksa, eds, Curtains of Iron and Gold. Reconstructing Borders and Scales of Interacion (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999), pp. 167–168.Google Scholar

53. Sec for example Ain Sarv, interview in Postimees, 26 January 2000.Google Scholar

54. Kolmas Seto Kongress 9 October, 1993. Värskas (Tartu: Seto Kongress: Vanemate Kogu, 1994), p. 84.Google Scholar

55. Neljas Seto Kongress 9. oktoobril 1996. a. Värskas, p. 28.Google Scholar

56. Maximova, op. cit., p. 60; Jääts, Setude etniline identiteet, p. 97.Google Scholar

57. During the Soviet period, nobody was willing to admit that there existed such a thing as a separate Setu nation. One of the consequences of this was that no researchers would concern themselves with this issue.Google Scholar

58. Here territory is understood as sociopsychological concept, according to Paasi, op. cit.; and Eiki Berg, “Etnosotsiaalsed protsessid,” Akadeemia, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1994, pp. 162–179.Google Scholar

59. Paasi, op. cit., p. 48.Google Scholar

60. The Third Seto Congress took place in 1993, the fourth in 1996 and the fifth in 1999, all three in Värska, the present unofficial capital of Setumaa.Google Scholar

61. Kolmas Seto Kongress 9. 10. 1993. Värskas; Neljas Seto Kongress 9. oktoobril 1996. a. Värskas; on the Fifth Seto Congress (1999), see Setomaa, No. 10, October–November 1999 (an online version is also available: http://www.estpak.ee/~setomaa).Google Scholar

62. Löfgren, op. cit., pp. 13–16.Google Scholar

63. Kolmas Seto Kongress 9. 10. 1993. Värskas, pp. 84–86.Google Scholar

64. Historical Võruma (pre-1939) refers to a much larger territory than the present Võru county, which was formed during the Soviet period. The area that in the pre-1939 period had been considered Setumaa is today divided between Russia and Estonia, and schools with Setu as the language of instruction exist only in the Estonian part.Google Scholar

65. See Urmas Seaver in Postimees, 23–24 March 2000.Google Scholar

66. The project for the epic was written by a setuphile of Estonian origin, Paulopriit Voolaine. He sent it in 1927 to the famous Setu folk singer Anna Vabarna, who sang the epic according to Voolaine's plan. Vabarna herself was illiterate; therefore her son wrote down the text. Voolaine, who considered the Setus a separate Finno-Ugric people, probably thought that if the Finns have their Kalevala and Estonians have Kalevipoeg, the Setus too must have their own epic. The epic was printed much later in Kuopio, Finland, and is called a national epic on the title page. See Paul Hagu, “Saateks,” in Paul Hagu and Seppo Suhonen, eds, Setu rahvuseepos Peko. Laulnud Anne Vabarna (Kuopio: Snellmann-Instituutti, 1995), pp. 18, 22, 36.Google Scholar

67. See the declaration of the Fifth Seto Congress, “About the border between Estonian Republic and Russian Federation:” “Any border changes made in the age-old Seto territory without the agreement of the Seto people and its representative body, the Seto Congress, are considered by the Seto Congress discriminating against the Seto people and treason against the principle of Estonian Republic's continuity” (text quoted from Setomaa, No. 10, October–November 1999).Google Scholar

68. Löfgren, op. cit., pp. 9, 22.Google Scholar