# family lived self-sufficently for 40 years w/o outside contact



## cindy-e (Feb 14, 2008)

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/histo...ontact-Unaware-of-World-War-II-188843001.html

Didn't know WW2 actually happened.  WOW! Thought you guys working toward 90% food production might find this account interesting. 

K. FWIW,

Cindyc.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

It's interesting and all ... but did you read the article?

Pretty harsh. The mother starved to death. They had no shoes since they were _eaten_ long since - replaced by birch bark wrappings. Most of them died of malnutrition, after barely surviving for years on a diet mainly of potato, rye and hemp seeds.

Yeah, they survived. But I don't think I'd hold them up as a shining example of sustainability.


----------



## pattycake (May 16, 2010)

This is very interesting.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

wow. just wow.


----------



## Jokarva (Jan 17, 2010)

Amazing....but sad too to think of the last family member living up there by herself.....


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Poor children. What a horribly deprived life. I noticed that the story did not touch much on the personality of the father other than that he was determined to stay the leader. I wonder at the untold story - of what the girls endured. Three men and no one to partner them.


----------



## soulsurvivor (Jul 4, 2004)

That was an incredible good read and thank you for sharing it. It's amazing how they managed to exist that long without any outside contact.


----------



## woodsy (Oct 13, 2008)

Quite a find. Amazing how little they survived on.


----------



## cindy-e (Feb 14, 2008)

Yea, I thought the whole thing was amazing. Sad too, in a way. Makes you think... is independence attainable? What could we do that they didn't have a chance to do? stuff to think about... hmmm...

Cindyc.


----------



## Sparkie (Aug 16, 2012)

cindy-e said:


> Yea, I thought the whole thing was amazing. Sad too, in a way. Makes you think... is independence attainable? What could we do that they didn't have a chance to do? stuff to think about... hmmm...
> 
> Cindyc.


Their climate was pretty harsh. Though with the author's description of the berries and pine nuts that were everywhere I'm not sure why they couldn't have foraged more and stored more food? Also, they were pretty poorly supplied. If they'd even had a bow and arrow it would've helped so much. I wonder why they didn't figure out how to make one. Maybe they'd never heard of such a thing in that place and time?

It sounds like they the man was a farmer but didn't really have much of an education on how to live in the wild. They made do.


----------



## Sparkie (Aug 16, 2012)

emdeengee said:


> Poor children. What a horribly deprived life. I noticed that the story did not touch much on the personality of the father other than that he was determined to stay the leader. I wonder at the untold story - of what the girls endured. Three men and no one to partner them.


Idk, the story didn't mention anything about any additional children other than the ones born from the wife. Surely there would've been children born if that had been going on.


----------



## chickenista (Mar 24, 2007)

No. None of that going on. Very, very strict Russina Orthodox sect.. Old Believers.

And they lived out there from 1936 until the 70's and the book was written in the 90's.
I read an article earlier today.


----------



## sisterpine (May 9, 2004)

The story struck me as incredibly sad and happy at the same time. What a blessed life they led. Thank you for sharing it. sis


----------



## ItchingDuck (Jan 25, 2012)

I found that story deeply disturbing. That paranoia and mental illness (imo) led the adults to put the families lives in jeopardy and ultimately crippled what could have been wonderful fully functional members of society.

On a side not- I am totally amazed that they survived for so long. I cannot imagine.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Sparkie said:


> Idk, the story didn't mention anything about any additional children other than the ones born from the wife. Surely there would've been children born if that had been going on.


Miscarriges, infant mortality, severely disabled (the result of incest) and lack of development in the males due to malnutrition would have been a very likely outcome and of course this would have been a very big secret. There is also the possibility of infanticide since this would be considered evidence of the sin or to avoid more mouths to feed. It is not like this has not happened before.

No where in the article was it mentioned that a doctor was brought in to examine or help these people. A gross negligence.


----------



## notbutanapron (Jun 30, 2011)

I would really like to positively believe in a world where just because a man is stranded with his sister, he knows not to rape her. I'd just like to think better of men than that, I suppose, If it's true or it isn't, I don't know. I just honestly don't think all men want to rape the second they're without sex. I think some can handle lives of celibacy. I'd like to think so, anyway. Though I doubt the women had enough nourishment to care for a child anyway. Notice the children are all from the beginning, before the serious starvation.

I really like the reaction to cellophane, though.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

I found it very sad. They survived, at least some of them, but their quality of life sounds like it was very poor. Guess they never learned to exploit the resources that were all around them, fish from the river and other food sources from the forest.


----------



## hercsmama (Jan 15, 2004)

I don't know.
I found it rather inspiring, sad that they felt pushed to such an extreme, certainly. But the shear strength of will, and pure faith, that made them do it. I mean at any time they could have thrown up their hands and gone back.
But they didn't. To have the moral fortitude to truly be willing to give up everything for your faith. I find it amazingly awesome.
I guess in our " bigger, better, badder, faster" society, some might see them as deprived. But I just don't see that, how can one be deprived unless they themselves feel that way.
I think it is an amazingly inspirational story. It shows the true strength of the human spirit.
Thank you for sharing it.


----------



## gettys1863 (Jan 24, 2013)

Wow that was a very interesting story.


----------



## SilverVista (Jan 12, 2005)

My husband and I bought our farm 30 years ago from an Old Believer family. You don't even want to know what we've gone through to clean this place up and make it acceptable even to deep rural conditions 30 years ago. This many years later, the most amazing stuff appears out of the mud in the sacrifice lot behind our barn in the winter and spring! These were people whose cultural identity for the last 300 years has involved persecution and poverty. Most of the local Old Believer community traces roots that fled Russia through either Turkey or China, and many of them went to South America before migrating to the Woodburn/Hubbard area of Oregon. There is also a fairly large community in and around Homer, Alaska, and many of our Oregon residents travel there to work on the fishing boats and then come back to farm blackberries and other small fruits during the summer. 

The most interesting part of the Old Believer tradition is that when families have rejoined their community here after decades or even centuries of separation during their escape and migration from Russia, their religious liturgy is virtually unchanged and they are able to join and worship, word for word, among the Old Believer community whenever and wherever they find them. They all still wear the cultural clothing from 100 years ago, married men do not shave, always wear a woven belt over a tunic; married women wear long dresses made from a specific pattern, and bind their hair in a certain way with a headdress and a scarf. 30 years ago most of the Russian kids dropped out of school after the 9th grade to marry and work on the farm or go to work on fishing boats for their uncles in Alaska. New generation still wears the cultural clothing, but more of the women are seeking professional careers, and the kids are completing a 12th grade education and then heading for college.


----------



## Limon (Aug 25, 2010)

ItchingDuck said:


> I found that story deeply disturbing. That paranoia and mental illness (imo) led the adults to put the families lives in jeopardy and ultimately crippled what could have been wonderful fully functional members of society.


You might want to read some Soviet history. There was nothing paranoid about it. Mass murder was the norm, especially in that time period. The communists had no qualms about murdering those who would not at least pretend to give up their religion.

As to their later life, it's hard to imagine what kind of mental state they were in. After so many years of isolation, the children especially would have been overwhelmed by the modern world. They had never seen anything other than their immediate family.


----------



## ChristieAcres (Apr 11, 2009)

What I found incredibly sad was their lack of ability to feed themselves consistently enough to remain healthy. Being cut off from civilization to such an extreme location, led to the end of that family line. That I also found sad. 

Having also studied multiple ways folks from long ago lived and survived? They had to know their wild edibles, grow food, own/raise critters, hunt, and fish.


----------



## ItchingDuck (Jan 25, 2012)

Limon said:


> You might want to read some Soviet history. There was nothing paranoid about it. Mass murder was the norm, especially in that time period. The communists had no qualms about murdering those who would not at least pretend to give up their religion.
> 
> As to their later life, it's hard to imagine what kind of mental state they were in. After so many years of isolation, the children especially would have been overwhelmed by the modern world. They had never seen anything other than their immediate family.


 
I am an anti-theist so the religious aspect does not sway my opinion. However that is a much deeper discussion best left untouched.


----------



## irregardless (Aug 9, 2012)

notbutanapron said:


> I just honestly don't think all men want to rape the second they're without sex. I think some can handle lives of celibacy. I'd like to think so, anyway.


There's a joke about being married here... I just know it.


----------



## Narshalla (Sep 11, 2008)

ItchingDuck said:


> I am an anti-theist so the religious aspect does not sway my opinion. However that is a much deeper discussion best left untouched.


Religion might not sway you, but the promise of death -- not a threat, a promise -- should mean a great deal.

The lowest number I've every heard about was 20 million, but most sources say that's low. Forty million is a number that is likely closer to the truth, and all of the people were Russians and other Soviet citizens.

As for religion, even atheism is a religion -- if you were told to join the State religion or die, would you rather die than change your beliefs?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

notbutanapron said:


> I would really like to positively believe in a world where just because a man is stranded with his sister, he knows not to rape her. I'd just like to think better of men than that, I suppose, If it's true or it isn't, I don't know. I just honestly don't think all men want to rape the second they're without sex. I think some can handle lives of celibacy. I'd like to think so, anyway. Though I doubt the women had enough nourishment to care for a child anyway. Notice the children are all from the beginning, before the serious starvation.
> 
> I really like the reaction to cellophane, though.


I find this interesting... What makes anyone think that an incestuous relationship is necessarily "rape" being committed by the man? And while we're here.... who did Adam and Eves kids marry?


----------



## cindy-e (Feb 14, 2008)

sooo... I guess we are not going to talk about survival. Instead we are going to talk about religion and incest? OK... not how I saw this going when I started this thread. =0(


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Cindy-e, I'll try to bring it back, it is interesting.

But it raises the question - just how are you going to define self sufficiency? Or survival.

I'd barely class it as survival. The mother died, and all that saved them - for a while anyway - is that one of the sons taught himself to hunt.
And really, the entire family died out. When studying wildlife, we call that a fail. A couple who did themselves raise children, none of whom were capable of interacting with others of their species in meaningful fashion, get mates or reproduce.
While on the one hand, they lived ~ not all of them and not long, 3 out of the 4 children died in their late 30s, early 40s. That's caveman lifespans.

And self-sufficiency ... not really. At least how I count it. They simply did not have the skills or knowledge base. Stone age cultures (Native Americans) had better quality of life.
I mean - once their pots wore out - they lost the ability to cook! 
How I read it, it if hadn't been for the one, enterprising son, Dmitri, who hunted and built a stove and made the birch bark things - they all would have died long before.
But again, I guess it's how you define it. Because really, it's pretty much impossible for a single family to be totally self sufficient. You need at least a small group. 
This is why humans are social animals.
As a species, we have to be. 
If there had been 3 or 4 families up there, maybe someone would have figured out how to cook. Someone might have known how to make leather, so they didn't have to wear disintegrating rags. They had a spindle and loom, but not enough time and energy, what with living on the brink of starvation, to devote to making fabric. There weren't enough of them.

And, you _do_ have to look at the mental aspect as well. The older son was described by his own father as being so "harsh" that the father worried about the family's safety should the father die.
The sight of another human being reduced them to groveling terror.
And again, while the youngest daughter did live a full lifespan, she was mentally incapable of leaving her environment, even in a small way, and couldn't relate to other people enough to have them be a meaningful part of her life.


----------



## cindy-e (Feb 14, 2008)

Otter said:


> Cindy-e, I'll try to bring it back, it is interesting.


THANK YOU! Ok, so you raise some good points. What survival skills do you think were missing?


----------



## soulsurvivor (Jul 4, 2004)

I was interested in the type of language inflections the sisters were using with each other; it said it was a type of cooing sound. It made me think of the talking babies video:

[YOUTUBE]_JmA2ClUvUY[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Well, survival skills are those that provide the basic necessities. 
Food; they had starvation rations, they needed a balanced and varied diet. They could garden - though it sounded as if they only had seeds for a very limited number of crops - but from the sounds of it, they didn't know how to use or store the wild resources around them. So even if they ate for the short summer, they starved the other 10 months of the year.
And while they gardened, they didn't raise livestock. So the only meat they had was hunted - and they _didn't know how, or have the tools to do so_. The one son taught himself to run down game. 
... you can run down a deer by yourself on foot. It takes several days. This is _not_ an efficient hunting method.

Shelter - which includes clothing. They didn't know how to make leather. They had no sheep for wool. Apparently they thought that they could supply all their needs with hemp fiber. From seed to cloth is a LONG process with many steps - that quickly became a luxury in time and resources they simply couldn't afford, and they had _nothing_ else to fall back on.
Heat - not just making it, but keeping it, which also circles back to shelter. Their home was described as a filthy, cold, dank hole. They probably had the materials to build a well chinked log cabin, or even a cordwood home. But they lacked the know how, and possibly the tools. Their only success there was that the youngest son managed to cobble together some kind of stove.
Have you read the Little House books? In 40 years they didn't manage what Pa could do in one season - provide sturdy, warm, heated shelter.

And even though they managed to survive for a time in that environment, the parents failed majorly. They raised children who could not survive anywhere else. Mental capacity for flexibility was missing, and that is very much a survival trait.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

emdeengee said:


> Miscarriges, infant mortality, severely disabled (the result of incest) and lack of development in the males due to malnutrition would have been a very likely outcome and of course this would have been a very big secret. There is also the possibility of infanticide since this would be considered evidence of the sin or to avoid more mouths to feed. It is not like this has not happened before.
> 
> No where in the article was it mentioned that a doctor was brought in to examine or help these people. A gross negligence.


The story mentions that three of the siblings died within a few days of each other in 1981 - all of the children except for the one who's still living there. Two had kidney failure, attributed to their diet, and Dmitri had pneumonia but refused medical attention.


----------



## dancingfatcat (Jan 1, 2008)

Maybe a launguage like in the movie "nell"?


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

They couldn't "go back". The only person who knew where "back" could be was the old father. That was even if he remembered or was willing, since all he knew was that "going back" meant death. That entire family was trapped there.

As for incest, moot point. Sex is a learned behavior. Those boys probably didn't even know what sex was or that they could have it...ditto the girls. As long as the father properly controlled himself after the death of his wife, they had no way to learn how to have it. It is not instinctual in humans. The children likely all died virgins.

I do not find it a heartening story. I find it a story of fear, starvation, and death, with no positive outcome for them. It is terribly, terribly sad.

The parents did not have the knowledge to do more than barely survive. The children had no basis to learn this knowledge. I could have lived a better life than they did having only started out with some rope, a hatchet, a knife and the clothes on my back.

I think it is terrible that the parents felt driven out there like this....and I find it horrifying that the children had to live and die like that.


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

I would make sure I had better survival skills than that before I'd go off into the wilderness. I am amazed they lived that long.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Caliann, I agree with you on all points save this;



CaliannG said:


> As for incest, moot point. Sex is a learned behavior. Those boys probably didn't even know what sex was or that they could have it...ditto the girls. As long as the father properly controlled himself after the death of his wife, they had no way to learn how to have it. It is not instinctual in humans.


I disagree. Think of it like this; Everyone, who, when you were between the age of 10 and 16, taught you how to masturbate?eep:
Ok, now, who's first time was with another virgin? You won't get the uniformity of the first answer there, but it's still a significant number.

But, they may well have all died virgins, for two reasons; 1) if the parents raised them from _before_ puberty that any such thing was _Sinful_, and put a lot of weight and fear on it.
Or, reason 2 is more specific to this situation - sickly animals don't mate. We're still mammals. Poor health kills the urge, and nutritional imbalance can even kill the ability.

Coming from the background of an animal behaviorist, there was just many signs of terrible wrongness. Those people barely survived for as long as they did and none of them thrived. That tells you something.


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

Otter, we ALL had some form of education that sex was possible. If not from our parents, then from siblings, peers, etc. Even if our first time was with another virgin, we were aware of the theory, if not the practice. For us, sex is *not* instinctual.  (Lifespan Growth and Development)

The Bible does not give enough information on the theory of sex to make it something that even young adults would figure out. Sex is far more complicated than masturbation. Masturbation is barely more complicated than scratching an itch. "It itches, scratches", "It feels good, rub it".

To take that and go to sex with no further information is implausible. If the children were not aware that they had compatible parts that fit together, they would not have figured it out for themselves.

This has been documented in feral children as well, when they have been feral past puberty. They don't figure out sex on their own.


----------



## Lilith (Dec 29, 2012)

I find this story deeply touching, not in a nice way, but as a simple reminder of what a person could be willing to trade for freedom. 
Not many truly know fear, not in a personal survival mode kind of way anyways. I find that only another human being can inflict this kind of fear on another person. When everything is taken from you, your possessions, your food, your family, you are often left with only your faith. This family traded a fulls stomach for their faith and security. I don't see that as being so bad. 
Each of us here is a member of this forum because we have a desire to learn the skills necessary to provide for ourselves. Where would we be if we had no chance to learn these skills, no opportunity to trade and barter and buy the things we need to maintain our homesteads? What would we do if we were met at every turn with a demand to give up our faith and way of life? If my sister were to be killed in front of me for not abandoning her beliefs, and I knew it was only a matter of time before it was me laying on the ground, I know what I would do. I would pack up my family and run deep into the forest where my harassers could not follow me. I would not care if I were well equipped or well educated. I would do whatever it took to survive and hope (there is that faith thing again) that I found a better life for my family. 
This family, after 300 years of persecution found freedom. What price would you pay to live with your faith and not worry about being killed for it? What price would you pay to see your children grow old? Thank god we have a chance at living better than they did.


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

If you do not look at their beliefs and consider their ordeal...it is a different story, one of escape, denial and life long pain. They suffered constant hunger pains, malnutrition, lack of energy, and did not have the most basic survival skills of the turn of the century man, the average mountain man or the natives that lived here before us. They did not display knowledge of drying more than potatoes? They also peeled them which takes most of the vitamin c and a significant amount of the nutritional benefits right out. They did not dry or preserve meats, fish, hunt, forage all the wild edibles in turn they could dry for winter and fall. The basic knowldge that food would be scarce in winter means...you gather large in the harvesting season. They could have taken a sharp rock if no other thought came to mind and found a small boulder and broke it in half. then tried to chip that away to form a hollow, this is not hard to do with a little patience and they had plenty of time. They most certainly could cook in a hollowed out rock. Pine needle tea provides essential vitamin c when no other source is there. The nuts that fell on their roof should have been gathered in volume for winter eating and a good protein source. Food is all around us no matter where we are if we know basic survival information on wild edibles! There are wild teas and greens, a source of calcium also, they could have eaten so much more! They could have taken different fibers from wild plants like Nettles and used the fiber to make cloth which they did not know how to make but had a spinning wheel??? They could have built an actual shelter if they had basic skills, that was a hovel they lived in. They starved their entire lives and died in pain from the complications of that starving and malnutrition plus the son of pneumonia. How so did the wife die of starvation and yet, the husband survived? What kind of man would let his wife do this? Why not split rations with her? It sounds like she just did without and sacrificed herself for her children. That is a tragic loss of life not survival at all. I have lots of curiosity why they had it so hard when an average man of those times would commonly have more skills than that Father displayed? He did not bring his family out there in the wild and provide for them the way we all discuss survival. This was a horrible way for his family to suffer their entire lives by his decision first and his inability to provide for them basic food second, their lack of contact with any other human! This is a story of extreme suffering and doing without basic human needs. Starving your entire life at the hands of your own Father is not a story of survival but intense suffering, starvation and torment of being trapped without basic needs which eventually killed 3 of them, I call that failure! Him going out into the wild the same way but knowing how to support them with enough food, good shelter and warmth... becomes a story of survival. This was a terribly sad story of his ultimate failure in this situation and the human ability to endure and live on despite great challenges... Yes, the last child survived without him!


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

I would very much like to see the study on feral children, if you have it. That's fascinating.

But I'm still not sure it's the same. Re-reading, the mother died when the youngest children were in their late teens. Living in one room, I'm sure the kids had some exposure, and the eldest son certainly was old enough to be aware, he was 9 when they went out and 2 more children were born after that. It looks as if the elder daughter was 6 and 9 for the birth of her siblings
And feral children are not exposed _at all_ to members of their own species. These children did have each other. And even if they're not sure exactly what to do, the urge to do _something_ is wildly strong in teens. Given a member of the opposite sex who is also feeling that wildly strong urge and knows that rubbing feels good, most figure it out.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

I gotta say the reactions here to this account are really interesting.

Bottom line, these people stayed alive for 40 years in a really harsh environment. I'd sure count that as *successful*


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

I thought the part about the rye grain popping up was a beautiul.

The daughter went back to live in the woods alone, that is not that bad. She was free to be with god and her devotion. Nature is close to god. I think the family was right to leave the human race behind.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Ok, did the math. 
Karp and Agafia survived for 40 + years there, Agafia (youngest daughter) more then that, but with tools, clothes, gardening help and probably direct food given to her after the family was "discovered"
Akulina, the mother, died of starvation 25 years in.
Savin and Natalia lived there 45 years, dying at the ages of 54 and 47, respectively.
Dmitri lived there 41 years and died at the age of 41.

However - these numbers make a really big assumption.
That the dates given for going out there and births are accurate.
The family had no calendar, and time keeping was left to the youngest daughter, who, if they kept track right, was born 7 years in.

Odds are excellent that unless there was a written account that isn't mentioned they were there less time then that. It's just the way the mind works. Hard times are longer, good times are shorter, we don't age until we feel it, and then when we are old we are really old - unless we keep track. If no one keeps track, people lose ages especially, very easily. 
And they didn't have much to mark it by.
Think about it - how old is your dog? Unless you're the kind to really keep track, you have to think about it. And often, you mark it by a major event. And generally, something triggers you to work out how long, you don't just walk around keeping dates in your head for no reason (unless you're my sister  she's weird that way)

For example, if, 3 weeks ago, you asked me how old Karma Cat was, I'd have shrugged and said about 4 or so. But then, DD _did_ ask me and she very seriously wanted to know, and I stopped to think about it.
My thought pattern went like this; _Well, we were living in upstate NY and it was just before DD's 5th birthday. It was definitely her 5th because we only lived there one year. She's 12 now so - holy wow, Karma's 7 years old already!_

So I'd be interested to know just how they're sure of the dates and how they kept track. Was it the reminiscing of an 80 year old man? Was he 80, that would mean he didn't start his family till pretty late?

Regardless, it is amazing that they lived for as long as they did.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyQIGgeeYno[/ame]

That link is at the bottom of the article and it shows pictures of the tools and things the family made. They made nice stuff.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

how did these people air dry potatoes?


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

Otter said:


> So I'd be interested to know just how they're sure of the dates and how they kept track. Was it the reminiscing of an 80 year old man? Was he 80, that would mean he didn't start his family till pretty late?
> 
> Regardless, it is amazing that they lived for as long as they did.


Running from the communists from invading a certain village(and missing out on ww2) is a pretty tack downable date.


----------



## Narshalla (Sep 11, 2008)

Otter said:


> (snip)Odds are excellent that unless there was a written account that isn't mentioned they were there less time then that. It's just the way the mind works. Hard times are longer, good times are shorter, we don't age until we feel it, and then when we are old we are really old - unless we keep track. If no one keeps track, people lose ages especially, very easily.
> And they didn't have much to mark it by.
> (snip)


I think this is only partly true, because Karp, the father, _did_ know the year he and his family fled Soviet persecution.

You are certainly correct about our perceptions of time, so their ages might not have been correct, but we do know how long they were out there, unless the father lied about that.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

City Bound said:


> how did these people air dry potatoes?


probably more like freezer burn--I've dried mushrooms that way


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

wyld thang said:


> I gotta say the reactions here to this account are really interesting.
> 
> Bottom line, these people stayed alive for 40 years in a really harsh environment. I'd sure count that as *successful*



When I think of "successful" I see this differently, I do understand your point. They managed to survive starvation caused by the inability of the Father to provide and teach them to harvest adequate sustenance all around them. The Mother did not survive 40 years as she died from starvation 25 years into it, giving up her life for her children, meanwhile her husband makes it? Staying alive to die painfully from Kidney Failure for two of them, and Pneumonia from the other...? Being starved painfully, cold with no shoes or adequate clothing? Amazing they survived that long but successfully? It was a miracle they survived as long as they did! You are right, they stayed alive in horrific conditions! Starvation and the icy cold winters..caused pain...most of us have no clue of the magnitude of. Success generally describes accomplishing a goal or triumph...I see this differently as do others, and this is all fine. It was posted for us to discuss and learn about...


----------



## TenBusyBees (Jun 15, 2011)

wyld thang said:


> I gotta say the reactions here to this account are really interesting.
> 
> Bottom line, these people stayed alive for 40 years in a really harsh environment. I'd sure count that as *successful*


Agreed.

There was no driving around, talking to realtors, internet searching for the "perfect" piece of property to homestead... they didn't have any homesteading reference books... they didn't have years of preps and supplies... when they fled they didn't have a state of the art BOB... they didn't have the technology available to them that we have today.

They used what they had available to them and made it worked... they survived. They had amazing strength and constitution in a very unideal situation. I doubt very few here c/would survive under the same conditions and with the same lack of supplies, first-aid, tools, etc.

I think it is an amazing story of survival.

I also found this very interesting: 
"Perhaps the saddest aspect of the Lykovs' strange story was the rapidity with which the family went into decline after they re-established contact with the outside world."
​ 
Having grown up in talgia and knowing no other way of life... do you think they knew how "bad" they had it?


----------



## TenBusyBees (Jun 15, 2011)

double post


----------



## mamita (May 19, 2008)

what an interesting story. I do think it's sad, yet amazing. it had to be extreme weather in the worst of winter, so I guess they mastered making fire? then to think they had to collect wood for those long months. without animal hides, how did they stay warm I wonder. for the starvation they endured, it is amazing they (even the mom that did live for years before dying) survived. how horrible. I imagine the children had no idea of life any other way, so maybe they didn't know how bad they had it. amazing what people with the spirit to survive can live thru.


----------



## Mid Tn Mama (May 11, 2002)

And THIS, my friends is why I love, love, love this website. This link is interesting from so many viewpoints. It's interesting also to read the many different takes on it from different people. It shows, as always, that we bring our past history, experience and knowledge to every thing we encounter.

I think it's interesting, first, because I've studied Russian history and knew about the old believers. What I didn't know, was that they were still around in the US? What????? Oregon???? But I suppose that makes sense given the proximity to Alaska. I've not traveled to that part of the world, but in my head, Oregon seems a long way from Alaska????

Next, I find it interesting because of the primitive ways they did NOT use. Was there no clay in the permafrost (I'm guessing) with which to make pots as the native Americans did? Were there no rocks or shale that could be used to put over a fire, next to a fire to cook with?Even rocks next to a fire, etc...

The floor, for instance, Surely there would be enough pine needles in those Taiga forests to have a warm flooring not susceptible to mice?

I was surprised that they had planted ALL their seed, and then experienced a total loss of crop that was only fixed by the miracle one volunteer plant from which they harvested 18 seeds.

Loved the terraced mountainside...


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

wyld thang said:


> I gotta say the reactions here to this account are really interesting.
> 
> Bottom line, these people stayed alive for 40 years in a really harsh environment. I'd sure count that as *successful*



This was my reaction, too.
For all of the criticisms of HOW this family survived (barely), the fact that they DID, with next to nothing, in one of the harshest regions on earth is a testament to human drive and ingenuity.
I appreciate the post, it was fascinating.
And as far as their ultimate demise, note that it was when they were exposed to outside diseases that it happened. Kidney failure was mentioned for the daughters and blamed on their poor diet, but we all know someone that has died this way, too.



City Bound said:


> how did these people air dry potatoes?


Maybe they did it with the stove that the son made?


----------



## Melissa (Apr 15, 2002)

I could have never stayed away from people and civilization that long. I would have just taken my chances...


----------



## salmonslayer (Jan 4, 2009)

It was a fascinating story and almost as fascinating are the reactions to it on this thread. For those criticizing the father for allowing the mother to die of starvation while he lived you should do some research on starvation. Bodies in starvation mode react differently and starvation causes all manner of medical maladies so she could have been eating much more rations than the father and still died while he lived...it had nothing to do with him "allowing" her to die.

The history of Russia at the time they started their foray into the Taiga is well documented and they had two things going against them, they were religious and their religion was considered rather extreme even for the time so they would have been targets of the Soviets.

If anything this is a cautionary tale about governmental and social persecution and religious extremism, all of which contributed to this families circumstances. The fascination with sex by some on this thread is interesting from a social standpoint, and I dont mean the people involved in the story, I am talking about why so many people (most?) cannot conceive that there was no incest happening particularly in light of the religious bent of so many posters here. Doesnt your religious beliefs override your carnal instincts or do you believe most people succumb to adultery, lust and baser instincts?


----------



## soulsurvivor (Jul 4, 2004)

I'm glad they weren't reduced to being cannibals. 

:bash: ok, ok, you knew someone had to say it.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

TenBusyBees said:


> Agreed.
> 
> 
> I also found this very interesting:
> ...


bingo!


----------



## Bettacreek (May 19, 2012)

I think some are being too judgemental and not really thinking. They lived for 40 years. If you really think about it, they adapted to their environment, created a style of hunting, etc. Sure, we could all tromp out into the woods with a pre-made bow and hunt. Tracking an animal for days isn't unefficient, because if you bring back 30lbs of elk meat, that's quite a bit for the time invested. Without spending time reading, socializing with buddies, etc, you have time. Plus, this is forty years... what equipment can you buy today that is going to last without care for 40 years? Even stuff from those days would not last 40 years. So those who insult them for not having better technology are the ones who would find it hard to survive long term, when the luxury of those items wear out. Has anyone here actually made an effective hunting weapon, without using ANY tools? Going to bet most haven't. Sometimes I think people watch too many survival shows, read too many books and think that they are now survival gods, without ever actually going out and trying half of the skills. Also, remember, they had no security net. They couldn't trade or purchase new seed or supplies. When you take a hike, you may see a lot of edibles, but could you really survive off of them for 40 years? Natural resources aren't like today's resources, where one plant can produce plenty of food. Look at a pine tree or wild berry bush. They don't produce nearly as much food as one would like to think. While we grew up as hubters and foragers in the mountains, sure, we collected a LOT of berries and meat, enough to last our family of five for a year, but that was WITH other supplemental food. Even with our background, we'd have starved if we had to rely solely on the mountain.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

These people were not preppers, they were not outdoors people, they were religious village people who ran away from murderous soilders so they could live their faith. so, when they ran off to the woods they had very little knowledge of bush craft. I admire these people. So what if they died of starvation or because illnesses brought on by the harsh envirnment, at least they died free and as their own masters.

If you check out that three part video I posted you can see in the second video how the remaining daughter lives. She has a giant ish trap in the river that is nice.


----------



## katheh (Jul 21, 2012)

I see a lot of "they couldn't" comments. There are all sorts of things they could've done, they just didn't. Perhaps they had their reasons, but the fact remains.

This story to me is a survival fail because they didn't effectively survive. They lived out their natural lives then the family lineage died out.

Honestly reading into it, it appears this Pop took the family on his own personal journey through the persecutions of Job and was content with that. It is not survival thinking to keep your family altogether separate from any type of society. Even cavemen ranged to find new blood to add to their gene pool, to perpetuate themselves.

I will say it is not altogether uncommon in primitive peoples for the matriarch to allow herself to starve in lean times while her husband does not. Once her children are beyond breastfeeding age it becomes the responsibility of the patriarch to ensure their survival and in most cases, their family continuation. If someone starves, the first is usually the mother, especially once past childbearing age.

I see a pretty clear arc in the story that things started out fairly well (so far as sufficiency goes) and then age, infirmity, and lack of societal contact brought them down and down and down to only the most basic necessities of life. They either had few skills (hunting etc) or the father did not find it important to teach his children any skills. Filthy living conditions, starving in proximity to fish, etc. I myself might very well have preferred a quick death at the hands of Lenin rather than have lived through such suffering.

The whole thing kind of reminds me of the Israelites being fed manna in the desert by birds. Perhaps he was counting on divine intervention.


----------



## woodsy (Oct 13, 2008)

Some decent book reviews on amazon



> As a survival reference the book is priceless: this people managed in an extremely harsh environment, completely on their own for decades. From a survivalist's point of view, it is the real deal. Sowing and harvesting your own hemp, spinning its fibers and then weaving your own clothes; then surviving Siberian winter on those clothes. Supplementing a monotonous diet of potatoes and pine seeds with very primitive hunting and fishing, even reaching the point of eating tree bark and leather when starving. Making almost all your utensils out of birch bark, wood or stone. Fire making with flint and steel. The book covers many interesting survival topics, tried and tested by real people in a hellish environment.


 I'm a real sucker for these kind of stories
so will get it through the local library, good winter reading .
Thanks to the OP for posting about it.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

Regarding the sex thing: People with severe mental retardation figure it out, and this is a huge problem for people who work with this population. As for a sex drive, yes, that does disappear with starvation but that doesn't mean it wasn't there to begin with.

It just boggles my mind that only Dmitri figured out how to hunt and trap animals. Were the parents vegetarian? I wonder.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

katheh said:


> I see a lot of "they couldn't" comments. There are all sorts of things they could've done, they just didn't. Perhaps they had their reasons, but the fact remains.
> 
> This story to me is a survival fail because they didn't effectively survive. They lived out their natural lives then the family lineage died out.
> 
> ...


wow, talk about danged if ya do, danged if ya don't...

their lineage did not go on because there was no babies, most likely this comes from the strong sense of morals--they father and mother did produce several chilren in the bush raising them to adulthood. there were no mates for the children. Sure the children could have had babies that died, but with the religion of the parents I suspect no mates being the primary cause of no offspring. 

Accusing them of killing babies because they were sinful on the basis of this article, just, WOW.

I've read accounts of survival in the years before modern conforts--look up what Captain Bering and his crew went through on his first voyage to Alaska. Or Fritjof Nansen and his crew in his quest to find the North Pole. Or Margaret Murie in traipsing about the Arctic with her biologist husband. On and on and on. 

I dont' think most folks realize how harsh the taiga is. There is a reason native peoples "up there" were on the coasts and hunted seals.

Gah!!!! go look up the Abakan River on google maps, follow it to 100 miles from the mongolian border, look for an unnamed tributary, it's beginning to transition to the Mongolan steppes. Harsh.

I salute these people full throttle, and I hope I meet them somewhere in my flying around the universe.


----------



## Big Dave (Feb 5, 2006)

What would be going on in the minds of those children when the geologists first came up. Fear the end of time? Could it be the same as when the spanish exploerers landed in the new world? When we encounter beings outside of where we exist? This is ddep stuff to wrap your head around. The most promoniate thing is their faith. It is what kept them thru all the things they went thru. Great story.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

Most people are not sexually attracted to their parents and siblings so maybe that is why it was so easy or them to abstain from sex. Also, survival comes before sex. If I was starving sex would be the last thing on my mind.


----------



## katheh (Jul 21, 2012)

wyld thang

I didn't say anything about incest, etc. My entire point was that there were no mates for the children and that's why the entire family died out. 

We have different ideas of what survival means. Nothing more. This story is just one huge example to me (and should be to those doomsday prep people) that one can't just completely withdraw from society and perpetually live any type of meaningful life beyond raw subsistence. Humans are social people, on many levels because the work of survival oftentimes requires more warm bodies than one father-mother set can produce.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

katheh said:


> wyld thang
> 
> I didn't say anything about incest, etc. My entire point was that there were no mates for the children and that's why the entire family died out.
> 
> We have different ideas of what survival means. Nothing more. This story is just one huge example to me (and should be to those doomsday prep people) that one can't just completely withdraw from society and perpetually live any type of meaningful life beyond raw subsistence. Humans are social people, on many levels because the work of survival oftentimes requires more warm bodies than one father-mother set can produce.


I didn't mean you personally about the incest comment, sorry. But it was put forth here in the thread. 

WHo are we to judge a solitary life as non-meaningful?


----------



## katheh (Jul 21, 2012)

Mountain-man solitary I can understand. But taking your family along for the ride, effectively eliminating any possibility of their free will and choice, is another. And is certainly not what the Bible teaches.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

I have to laugh at all the rabid responses. Yes I did go there. The lives these people lived was absolutely horrible. They lived like savages. I was going to say they lived like animals but animals have more intelligence about them than these people. And even describing them as living like savages is incorrect since "savages" have adapted to their environment and have their own societies. They certainly would have used the resources around them to build a decent home. Both animals and "savages" keep a clean home not one that was filthy beyond description. 

This family was completely unprepared and did not seem to have any ability to adapt. Just to exist. And their existance was one of extreme suffering - starvation, isolation and a Russian winter is not a picnic. They ate their shoes. Their life was not Little House on the Prairie. It was not noble.

As for incest and infant mortality or infanticide - a definite possibility and this is not something that would surprise anyone given the circumstances of their existance and the fact that it has happened many times before. Being religious certainly does not prevent anyone from committing horrific acts. Or justifying what they do. Given the kind of isolation these people endured and the fact that there were no social mores to obey except those decreed by the all powerful father it would probably be a quite normal turn of events. It is naive to think that this could not have been the life of these women. Even in your town there are people practicing incest and then asking forgiveness from their religion. Or not.


----------



## ItchingDuck (Jan 25, 2012)

emdeengee said:


> I have to laugh at all the rabid responses. Yes I did go there. The lives these people lived was absolutely horrible. They lived like savages. I was going to say they lived like animals but animals have more intelligence about them than these people. And even describing them as living like savages is incorrect since "savages" have adapted to their environment and have their own societies. They certainly would have used the resources around them to build a decent home. Both animals and "savages" keep a clean home not one that was filthy beyond description.
> 
> This family was completely unprepared and did not seem to have any ability to adapt. Just to exist. And their existance was one of extreme suffering - starvation, isolation and a Russian winter is not a picnic. They ate their shoes. Their life was not Little House on the Prairie. It was not noble.
> 
> As for incest and infant mortality or infanticide - a definite possibility and this is not something that would surprise anyone given the circumstances of their existance and the fact that it has happened many times before. Being religious certainly does not prevent anyone from committing horrific acts. Or justifying what they do. Given the kind of isolation these people endured and the fact that there were no social mores to obey except those decreed by the all powerful father it would probably be a quite normal turn of events. It is naive to think that this could not have been the life of these women. Even in your town there are people practicing incest and then asking forgiveness from their religion. Or not.


This is what I was thinking exactly.


----------



## SmokyShadow (May 19, 2007)

"_When they first got to know the geologists, the family would accept only a single gift&#8212;salt. (Living without it for four decades, Karp said, had been "true torture.")_"

"_Both Savin and Natalia suffered from kidney failure, most likely a result of their harsh diet._"

Perhaps the sudden introduction of salt after 40 years might have played a role in their death?


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

I watched the you tube City Bound posted. All three parts. In Russian. I don't speak a word of Russion, so I watched instead. In either the second or third part they showed the family fishing. They built a trap across the river that allowed water to flow through slats but captured fish. Pretty ingenious! But they had to wade into the river to gather up the fish, and this would have killed them to get wet in freezing weather. So I think they enjoyed fish when the weather was good . 

The Indians used to preserve fish by smoking and drying it. I don't know that these people had that knowledge.

The mother may have had some health issue that caused her to be unable to eat at the end. When myMIL was dying of cancer, she wasnt able to eat for the last few months. She would have died sooner without IV fluids.

Or she may have had severe depression, which would certainly have been understandable.


----------



## cindy-e (Feb 14, 2008)

That may be so (below) but I think it is very easy to judge the father from here without knowing all of the information. They may have only made it a few years and under extreme circumstances, but he believed that if he stayed they would die very quickly. Perhaps he did prolong their lives, and if you have read anything at all about russian gulags, the suffering they could have experienced had he not done what he did was actually worse than what happened. Sometimes you just don't have any good choices. sometimes you just have to do what seems like the least terrible thing and then hope for the best. 

But that is why I started the thread, and what I hoped to get out of it. What did he miss? What do we need to learn, or to have, to be ready for the extreme circumstances for which he was not ready? =0) That is my question. 



romysbaskets said:


> If you do not look at their beliefs and consider their ordeal...it is a different story, one of escape, denial and life long pain. They suffered constant hunger pains, malnutrition, lack of energy, and did not have the most basic survival skills of the turn of the century man, the average mountain man or the natives that lived here before us. They did not display knowledge of drying more than potatoes? They also peeled them which takes most of the vitamin c and a significant amount of the nutritional benefits right out. They did not dry or preserve meats, fish, hunt, forage all the wild edibles in turn they could dry for winter and fall. The basic knowldge that food would be scarce in winter means...you gather large in the harvesting season. They could have taken a sharp rock if no other thought came to mind and found a small boulder and broke it in half. then tried to chip that away to form a hollow, this is not hard to do with a little patience and they had plenty of time. They most certainly could cook in a hollowed out rock. Pine needle tea provides essential vitamin c when no other source is there. The nuts that fell on their roof should have been gathered in volume for winter eating and a good protein source. Food is all around us no matter where we are if we know basic survival information on wild edibles! There are wild teas and greens, a source of calcium also, they could have eaten so much more! They could have taken different fibers from wild plants like Nettles and used the fiber to make cloth which they did not know how to make but had a spinning wheel??? They could have built an actual shelter if they had basic skills, that was a hovel they lived in. They starved their entire lives and died in pain from the complications of that starving and malnutrition plus the son of pneumonia. How so did the wife die of starvation and yet, the husband survived? What kind of man would let his wife do this? Why not split rations with her? It sounds like she just did without and sacrificed herself for her children. That is a tragic loss of life not survival at all. I have lots of curiosity why they had it so hard when an average man of those times would commonly have more skills than that Father displayed? He did not bring his family out there in the wild and provide for them the way we all discuss survival. This was a horrible way for his family to suffer their entire lives by his decision first and his inability to provide for them basic food second, their lack of contact with any other human! This is a story of extreme suffering and doing without basic human needs. Starving your entire life at the hands of your own Father is not a story of survival but intense suffering, starvation and torment of being trapped without basic needs which eventually killed 3 of them, I call that failure! Him going out into the wild the same way but knowing how to support them with enough food, good shelter and warmth... becomes a story of survival. This was a terribly sad story of his ultimate failure in this situation and the human ability to endure and live on despite great challenges... Yes, the last child survived without him!


----------



## Saffron (May 24, 2006)

My thoughts(just reading the artical, haven't watching the video):

on sex - who knows if they did or didn't mess around. Due to their upbringing, it would have been hidden from the scientists if they did.

regarding offspring - they were severely malnourished, so the odds are highly unlikely that the girls would have gotten pregnant.

on survival - I think they survived. 25 years, 40 years, 60+ years. They were surviving. They may not have had the best food for the body, but they were alive and able to continue to do so.

three dying quickly - this bugs me. Okay the one gets pneumonia possibly from the scientists, but the other two had kidney failure. Somewhat suspicious to me. I wonder what foods they were given by the scientists that perhaps their bodies could not "handle" ?

I would love to read more about them. That they survived is a wondrous thing and a great story, but I would love more in depth information about the way they survived and how they adapted to their environment or made their environment adapt to them.


----------



## katheh (Jul 21, 2012)

What I learned from them is that to survive with any quality of life at all, we need other people. A society on no matter how small a scale.


----------



## ChristieAcres (Apr 11, 2009)

I would never debate their apparent will to live, but had they been familiar with Wild Edibles at the very least, knew how to preserve foods, and hunted from the beginning? At least they wouldn't have suffered from such harsh conditions caused by periods of starvation. This story should serve as a wake-up. Seriously, how would most of us survive if also being subjected to those conditions? This has happened after plane crashes...

I consider it detrimental to know your local Wild Edibles and the general types found in most of the Country. The more you can identify, the better off you are. These folks were not prepared at all, didn't have access to the wealth of information we have, but yet they survived...

It is truly amazing how long they did live! When they fled, it was for their very lives. They didn't have time to suddenly prepare for life in such extreme conditions. Rather than judge them in any way, their courage and will to survive is to be admired. However, we should learn from this and the stories of others, who faced similar conditions.

This makes me think of the four Miners, who were stranded at Lost Cabin Creek, in the Rocky Mountains, due to the sudden change in weather (turn of the Century). When they ran out of provisions, one-by-one, they perished, without resorting to cannibalism. Interesting to note? They were in an area rich with Wild Edibles all year around...

DH and I enjoy hiking, don't get too radical, though. The areas we do hike are not "extreme," but even then? If there is a severe earthquake, we could be stranded... "How to Stay Alive in the Woods," and at least one Wild Edible book goes with us. DH also carries some needed supplies. Even then, I sure hope we are never faced with that harsh reality.


----------



## Saffron (May 24, 2006)

lorichristie said:


> (snip)
> *I consider it detrimental to *know your local Wild Edibles and the general types found in most of the Country. The more you can identify, the better off you are. These folks were not prepared at all, didn't have access to the wealth of information we have, but yet they survived...
> (snip).


I think you used the wrong word in this statement.

Perhaps "Imperative" or "Necessary" or "Required"

or did you mean detrimental NOT to know?


I agree about the wild foods. I found a book years ago with drawings, identifiers, and recipes for the wild edibles in my area. And I also add to my "library" if we are going to be visiting or camping somewhere for a length of time.


----------



## coolrunnin (Aug 28, 2010)

To me it is amazing they could have existed as long as they did ( I have a real problem calling what they did living) and a testament to human resilience.

Forced out into the wilderness with what you could grab before the agents showed up took some big one's.


----------



## woodsy (Oct 13, 2008)

The smithsonian article leaves a lot of room for armchair quarterbacking.
I read forty or more years of this familys history in about 10 minutes, hardly enough
to draw the conclusions some here seem to.


----------



## ChristieAcres (Apr 11, 2009)

Saffron said:


> I think you used the wrong word in this statement.
> 
> Perhaps "Imperative" or "Necessary" or "Required"
> 
> ...


Here you go, fixed it for you:



> *I consider it detrimental to lack knowledge of your local Wild Edibles* and the general types found in most of the Country. The more you can identify, the better off you are. These folks were not prepared at all, didn't have access to the wealth of information we have, but yet they survived...


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

> As for religion, even atheism is a religion


No, it's not. I get so tired of hearing this.


----------



## salmonslayer (Jan 4, 2009)

I am wondering if anyone actually read the article or watched the excellent videos. They did have tools they made, they made their own fire, they smoked meat and fish when they could get it (its in the video) they had extensive gardens, they did hunt and have furs, they made their own cloth, they lived in a cabin, they had elevated food caches, they had fish traps, they gathered the available forage and they lived for 40 years like that and the one daughter is still living like that. Its even in the article about how they gathered berries, wild edibles, pine nuts etc which carried them through the winter. The problem though is all it takes is one bad weather event to put them in peril and that is why they were always food insecure or on the verge of starvation.

Yup, they lacked any type of survival skills alright. The starvation period where they were reduced to eating bark and leather and when the mother died was when a snow and heavy frost hit them in June and wiped out their crops and almost destroyed their entire seed base. And for those of you used to the abundant wild life in the lower 48, game is much less dense in that part of the world and it would be very difficult to obtain without fire arms. The Taiga isnt like your used to where deer and the antelope play.

They might not have been living to the standards some armchair anthropologists think they should have but they showed plenty of determination, resourcefulness and skill to survive as long as they did.


----------



## ChristieAcres (Apr 11, 2009)

I have to say I really wonder how all of us would fare, if thrust into a similar situation. I wager most would perish rather quickly...


----------



## highlands (Jul 18, 2004)

Otter said:


> you can run down a deer by yourself on foot. It takes several days. This is _not_ an efficient hunting method.


Have you ever done it? I have. Running down big or small game on foot is actually not all that hard. We're evolved for it. We have the heart, lungs, legs and ability to keep cool which most animals don't have for distance running. We are very good long distance runners and we can work as teams. The trick is to keep the game going and ideally to run it in a circle so that you can tag team it with several people. Know your terrain. You herd it as much as you run it. Each person runs the animal almost as hard as they can for a short distance. The people get to rest 75% or more of the time but the animal has to keep running continuously and never gets to rest. They quickly tire out and then you can easily take them down. This is not about chasing down but about exhausting the prey. That way it can't fight back. Wolves use the same technique.

The comments here surprise me. It was almost like many people here had read a totally different article than the one at the Smithsonian link. Or perhaps some people still need to go and actually read the article... 

I was struck by how well that family did. They were just random people who were forced into the woods by their oppressive government. Perhaps you've forgotten what that country's rulers were like. It was horrific. This family didn't set out to be survivalists or 90%ers. They were fleeing for their lives because their government was killing them.

In this story we have a small group of random people without training or skills and they actually managed to survive very well over a very long period of time without any outside support structure from society. They did very well. Their lives were about average length without modern medicine. Ironically, what ultimately killed some of them them was contact with humanity.

The fact that they did as well as they did without any prepping is extraordinary. They invented much of what they did, the skills, the tools. The Soviet government specifically taught people to be dependent and purposefully destroyed people's ability to live outside society. It was part of the means of control of people. You and I have books to learn from, elders to learn from and the leisure time to practice. This family had to learn while they were surviving. That's a _*lot*_ harder.

As to starvation? No, they weren't dying of starvation. They were surviving. You don't die of starvation over a period of 40 years. Starvation kills far faster. There were millions of people who were within society in the Soviet Union who were dying of starvation with all the 'bounty' the Soviets provided. The average lifespan in the Soviet was 49 years. Partly due to drinking but also poor diet. Even today it is not much better there with all the free health care and support of society. (http://edition.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/05/19/russia.health/index.html) The fact that this family lived as long as they did says they were succeeding.

Admittedly the gene pool was too small for much likelyhood of continuation but that is a separate issue. They did birth and raise children to adulthood. That is success.

This story was about the extremes that people will go to survive against the oppression of their government in a hostile evironment. They did amazingly well considering they had no training or preparation. They were a success.


----------



## Narshalla (Sep 11, 2008)

Tiempo said:


> No, it's not. I get so tired of hearing this.


Then what is it?

It is a belief system, just like religion.


----------



## ItchingDuck (Jan 25, 2012)

Narshalla said:


> Then what is it?
> 
> It is a belief system, just like religion.


 
I am only responding to this because it seems like a general question. This really isn't the place for a religious debate and I do not intend to get into one. I like all the different views on this thread and find it very interesting to see how we all read the same article and all have a very different view on it.

Atheism is a LACK of belief. There has been no proof offered of any god(s) or deity and therefor we do not take the existence of one based on flawed "evidence". IF evidence (peer reviewed) is introduced to PROVE beyond a shadow of a doubt that a god exists, then by all means an atheist would admit one was there.

My personal definition of atheism. 

The OFFICIAL definition is : A lack of belief in any god(s)

This is not to be a debate. This is intended to answer the question. I in no way worship anything nor do I hold a belief. I merely assert that there is no proof of one and hold true to that until evidence is shown to me.


----------



## Rowenna7 (Dec 22, 2005)

There has been a lot of debate on the sex question. Only one of the brothers would have even been capable of it. It mentions at one point in the article that Savin castrated himself for religious reasons. Taking that into consideration, I believe that any sex among the children was highly unlikely.


----------



## chewie (Jun 9, 2008)

I 'liked' several posts on how these ppl weren't 'survivors', then read highland's. I'm swaying my thoughts towards what he's said. 

I think these folks were just average folks, maybe even town dwellers who suddenly had to go to that rough country to live. wow. really, wow. who knows what skills they had to start with? did it say anywhere, what they did in their previous life? even here, today, many town ppl wouldn't have a clue on how to, say, butcher a goat. and dont' give them a book or modern tools, geesh, that'd be tough.

we do much for ourselves here, but its easy to say when I can go look something up on google, or if I am hungry my freezer is full. its easy to say you're not hungry when you've just had a steak! 

and, did they think this was going to be forever? I think it sounds like they were prepared to stay a while but not forever. and really, running for your very life, and that of your children's., how much do you pack? I hand it to ol pops, he seen a threat to his family and did something about it. 

pioneers in this very area that I live now, had it much easier, better climate/land and it was still hard. and they did have chances to buy tools, etc. 

I can't imagine spending a harsh winter in a soddy taht is nearby here--and I'd bet our winter is nothing compard to this family, yet they made it all that time? 

as to eating wild things, how to know which is ok? eat one, live. eat another, dead. they really didn't have anyone to show them, and would you chance that? I wouldn't. 

as for the sex issue, I can see both sides. I have a hard time thinking they didn't do anything but with such a strong religion, laying with one's sister wouldn't have been the solution, I don't think. I am guessing they did plenty of self loving. 

this is one of the best posts/discussions ever on this forum!


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

This family fled persecution but they so isolated themselves that they missed reality. The mother need not have starved to death. By 1961 (and even earlier than that) the family could have come out of hiding and entered into a safe environment. By the time they were "discovered" in 1978 they could have rejoined their religious communitee or moved close enough to civilization that they could have had their way of life but without such incredible suffering. What a waste of life.


----------



## Melissa (Apr 15, 2002)

http://www.amazon.com/Lost-Taiga-Fifty-Year-Religious-Wilderness/dp/0385472099

There is a book about the family. I just reserved it from my library.


----------



## Bettacreek (May 19, 2012)

I like how some are saying that the children born in the woods are socially and mentally inept. How can you say that? They socialized within the family (probablymore than most American families these days), and interacted with the scientists. As for the daughter wanting to stay? Really, that makes her a mental case? So all of our grandfathers who refuse to use cell phones are mentally inept because they enjoy what they have? Am I inept because I don't have the latest iphone and prefer the slightly older technology of a basic flip phone? I guess we're all backwards idiots, since many of us want to embrace a more simple lifestyle and don't want to live in city apartments and buy every last bite of food from the store.


----------



## vicki in NW OH (May 10, 2002)

What I am wondering is why they didn't flee with other Old Believers who also went deep into Siberia to escape persecution. The Orthodox are like Catholics. We need our mysteries (sacraments), priests, bishops, and community of believers.


----------



## Bettacreek (May 19, 2012)

As for sex not being a natural instinct for humans, then I suppose five and six year olds are all taught to self gratify? Apparently we have a LOT more sexual child abuse in this country than anyone knows, since in nursing school, you are taught that that is the age group most first start experimenting with it. Has to be widespread if it's taught in school. Not a natural instinct, LOL. I am seriously simply amazed at some of the comments and harsh judgements here.


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

ItchingDuck said:


> I am only responding to this because it seems like a general question. This really isn't the place for a religious debate and I do not intend to get into one. I like all the different views on this thread and find it very interesting to see how we all read the same article and all have a very different view on it.
> 
> Atheism is a LACK of belief. There has been no proof offered of any god(s) or deity and therefor we do not take the existence of one based on flawed "evidence". IF evidence (peer reviewed) is introduced to PROVE beyond a shadow of a doubt that a god exists, then by all means an atheist would admit one was there.
> 
> ...


Conversations drift, it's one of the things that makes life interesting 

In my case I have a complete lack of belief, I don't go though my day wondering how best to not believe in any god or gods, I simply don't, it plays no role in my life at all.

I don't see how such an absence of belief could be considered a religion in any way.


----------



## Ruby (May 10, 2002)

katheh said:


> Mountain-man solitary I can understand. But taking your family along for the ride, effectively eliminating any possibility of their free will and choice, is another. And is certainly not what the Bible teaches.


I don't think it was a matter of "taking your family along for the ride," It was a matter of life or death, OR renouncing your faith. I would have done the same thing. 

There will be a time in the future where we will all have this choice to make and I don't think it will be too far in the future.

I just bet the father didn't keep them there under lock and key. After they got to be adults I'm sure they could have left. As far as the mother starving, who's to say she didn't have some kind of internal disease. The person who talked about the pain of starving, they say starving is not painful. I wouldn't know because I'm a long way from starving.


----------



## Bettacreek (May 19, 2012)

vicki in NW OH said:


> What I am wondering is why they didn't flee with other Old Believers who also went deep into Siberia to escape persecution. The Orthodox are like Catholics. We need our mysteries (sacraments), priests, bishops, and community of believers.


Not everyone is going to wait around while neighbors are being slaughtered. Besides, how do you know you won't get ratted out by someone? The more people who know a life-threatening secret, the more loose mouths to get you killed.


----------



## Limon (Aug 25, 2010)

The daughters were hysterical the first time meeting someone outside the family. That's not a healthy reaction. It could have been a fear the government had finally caught up to them, but there's nothing to indicate that was the cause. There's a difference between choosing not to be social and not knowing anyone at all but a few immediate family members. I have no idea what a cell phone has to do with any of this discussion.

As for how poorly they fared, one thing to remember is Russian serfs were notoriously uneducated at the time of the revolution. The parents probably didn't know there were better ways of doing things; they had to make do with what they could think of themselves. It's one thing to make a bow and arrow - if you know they exist - and quite another to come up with the idea yourself.

I think the real moral of this story is that knowledge is the best thing you can have in order to survive.


----------



## alpacaspinner (Feb 5, 2012)

After reading the article and all the comments (but not watching the video) I have 3 comments.
1) As to drying potatoes - perhaps they did something like the people living in the Andes are said to have done; cook the potatoes, and let them freeze outside overnight. Because of the intense cold they tend to freeze dry. This is very simplified, I haven't looked up the specifics. The Russian winter would certainly be cold enough, though it is possible that the altitude in the Andes also played a role. Just throwing that out there; as I said I haven't looked up specifics.
2) Someone commented that reasonable people don't take their families out into the wilderness when they know they don't have the knowledge to take care of themselves. I seem to remember from high school history class that that is exactly what the pilgrims did. They left their homes to go to the new world, taking their families, and looking for freedom to practice their religion. Many of them were from towns and cities, and hadn't a clue about farming. And yet they went off into the raw wilderness. Granted, they were in larger groups than this single Russian family, but many people with no or little knowledge isn't necessarily better than just a few. Had it not been for the indians many would have starved that first winter, and in fact some did.
3) As someone else has already pointed out, staying in place when the authorities are trying to kill or imprison one is less of a survival tactic than taking what one can carry and running. The man saw his brother shot, and had every reason to believe that he would be too. And who would care for the family then? Whatever else may be said about running into the woods unprepared, they _were_ able survive longer than Stalin might have let them.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

As with most famines, it's crop failures that are the thing that pushes people closest to the end. Hunting works only in those places that have few enough people hunting that the animals are not wiped out. 
In the book The Good Earth, the idea of eating your seed stock to survive is the most challenging choice. A few years of drought, followed by it's plagues of insects, or unseasonable cold or wet or anything else can mean no harvest at all. 
I just finished a book called Shipwreck that followed life in small Japanese village - their survival was so close to the edge, that a late or missing season for one kind of seafood meant starvation for some over the winter. Their bounty came when a shipwreck occurred that gave them extra food and supplies. They actually had a way of life that revolved around encouraging ships to gound on their beach- they had annual prayers to ask for a shipwreck that season. It did not happen in all years and brought it's own dangers.
Right now we can get food and seeds from a wide enough geographic area that seed can be obtained from areas not so impacted. Even in good years, unremitting work is needed for basic survival on your own. 
When it comes down to it, most of the population would die out if they can not move to more productive areas. 
A good reason not to think that safety comes from total isolation.


----------



## vicki in NW OH (May 10, 2002)

Bettacreek said:


> Not everyone is going to wait around while neighbors are being slaughtered. Besides, how do you know you won't get ratted out by someone? The more people who know a life-threatening secret, the more loose mouths to get you killed.


That is true. My priest is from Yugoslavia. He was a child during WW2 when the cleansing of ethnic Germans took place. His father got the family out in the nick of time, others did not and were killed.


----------



## ChristieAcres (Apr 11, 2009)

I absolutely agree with this, as I am not into debating anything. These folks were who they were and lived despite the odds, far longer than most would. 



> I think the real moral of this story is that knowledge is the best thing you can have in order to survive.


----------



## katheh (Jul 21, 2012)

They obviously knew something of agriculture, or they would not have had such orderly looking fields. Those who know of agriculture generally know of livestock (even small stock). It is a well-known fact that the majority of the Russian population subsisted on even the smallest rodents.

I think it is telling indeed that none of the children did leave when physically able to do so. The hysteria of the girls also disturbs. Obviously interaction with other people was taught to be strictly taboo, strongly enough that none would attempt to leave, even when facing starvation.


----------



## Bettacreek (May 19, 2012)

Limon said:


> The daughters were hysterical the first time meeting someone outside the family. That's not a healthy reaction. It could have been a fear the government had finally caught up to them, but there's nothing to indicate that was the cause. There's a difference between choosing not to be social and not knowing anyone at all but a few immediate family members. I have no idea what a cell phone has to do with any of this discussion.
> 
> As for how poorly they fared, one thing to remember is Russian serfs were notoriously uneducated at the time of the revolution. The parents probably didn't know there were better ways of doing things; they had to make do with what they could think of themselves. It's one thing to make a bow and arrow - if you know they exist - and quite another to come up with the idea yourself.
> 
> I think the real moral of this story is that knowledge is the best thing you can have in order to survive.


Choosing not to be social? Did you read and watch? An initial reaction of fear in that situation is NORMAL. They came out shortly after, when they realized the scientists meant no harm, and quickly started socializing with them. Most bears won't come and attack you at your house, but you still don't run up to one and pet it. And before you say "what's that got anything to do with it", THINK. We can only use common day, civilized examples, since not a one of us has been in their exact situation, so you must compare.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Limon said:


> The daughters were hysterical the first time meeting someone outside the family. That's not a healthy reaction. It could have been a fear the government had finally caught up to them, but there's nothing to indicate that was the cause. There's a difference between choosing not to be social and not knowing anyone at all but a few immediate family members. I have no idea what a cell phone has to do with any of this discussion.
> 
> As for how poorly they fared, one thing to remember is Russian serfs were notoriously uneducated at the time of the revolution. The parents probably didn't know there were better ways of doing things; they had to make do with what they could think of themselves. It's one thing to make a bow and arrow - if you know they exist - and quite another to come up with the idea yourself.
> 
> I think the real moral of this story is that knowledge is the best thing you can have in order to survive.


Well- I know that I am careful when people just show up at my place. I think that their reactions were actually fairly brave- they did not bolt for the woods at the sight of strangers. Being cautious is what I would call exactly a healthy reaction.
In the first place, there were no "serfs" at the time of the communist revolution. They had long been free. But that they were used to hard work of agriculture at that time in their country and climate and knew how to make things grow meant they could survive where I suspect a college professor might not. 
But I agree that it one reason to maintain a knowledge hunting, trapping, weaving, etc skills. And not to denigrate a "woman's" skills of healing, cooking, weaving, sewing, etc. There is good reason that the odds of survival improve with both these skill sets.
It is always easy for one to think they would have done better but each place and time has challenges and they were still there to be found. No mean achievement.


----------



## ItchingDuck (Jan 25, 2012)

I guess that while I understand his decision to leave to save his family, I do not understand him not returning, not checking things out to see if there was still danger once in 40 yrs. I would take my kids and run too.I know that I would certainly check to see if life would be safe were I to return.


----------



## Bettacreek (May 19, 2012)

ItchingDuck said:


> I guess that while I understand his decision to leave to save his family, I do not understand him not returning, not checking things out to see if there was still danger once in 40 yrs. I would take my kids and run too.I know that I would certainly check to see if life would be safe were I to return.


I somewhat agree, but somewhat understand the family's decision. After getting that far, I wouldn't want to risk everything and return, only to possibly be shot dead within fifteen minutes of return.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

It's all well and good to criticize these people, but IMHO, the truth is that they did far better for much longer than most of us would if we had to flee suddenly with only what we could carry.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

ItchingDuck said:


> I guess that while I understand his decision to leave to save his family, I do not understand him not returning, not checking things out to see if there was still danger once in 40 yrs. I would take my kids and run too.I know that I would certainly check to see if life would be safe were I to return.


They went in gradual stages over really hard travel. It would not be easy to "check" back at all. And I suspect that there was no real "free' time to allow travel. Too rough to travel much in the winter where they were and every moment of work needed other times just for them to survive. 
Beside a gradual decay sort of saps the will.


----------



## salmonslayer (Jan 4, 2009)

Bettacreek said:


> *So all of our grandfathers who refuse to use cell phones are mentally inept because they enjoy what they have? *


Hey, hey, hey, there...I am a grandfather and I refuse to have a cell phone!

I think part of the problem is that its hard for people who havent experienced it to even imagine the harsh conditions they managed to survive in. I was stationed in Alaska when I was sent to Mongolia as part of a military exchange program and the winter I spent in Mongolia was a whole other level of cold and harsh. I had the advantage of top of the line cold weather gear, hot chow each day, and the knowledge that sooner or later we would be going back to barracks; I cant even imagine how difficult it would be to survive without those advantages. I had to turn up the heat just thinking of it and I know I couldnt do what they did (no bourbon, no chew, I would have taken my chances with the Bolsheviks!).

But I have a hard time thinking of them with pity or that they wasted their lives.... I see people who have wasted their lives almost everyday and to me these people are in a far different category.

Great thread and topic and interesting responses from everyone.


----------



## cindy-e (Feb 14, 2008)

yea, the word cold doesn't quite cut it, does it?


----------



## DebbieLynn (Dec 1, 2010)

Amazing story! I just hope that when the time or situation arises I'm able to take care of myself and my family. I have had the luxury of education, life experiences,etc to draw upon. I used to take surplus eggs to my workplace and remember how shocked I was when grown adults with the same access to knowledge and better education than myself did not know where eggs came from! Seriously could not tell where the egg came from other than the "store". I think if we all looked closely we could probably find many people that way even in our own families. I think too about the fact these people lived without outside influence and did the best they could with what they had. Think about all the illness each of us have been to the Dr for in 40 years. These people never saw a Dr. I'm thinking they very much survived and then some. No it certainly wasn't to my standards but it wasn't me out there. If you had to leave your home right now this minute without your "bug out bags" surplus food, no hunting gear etc and just the clothes on your back with your immediate family how well do you think you would do in the same location as this family? I certainly would not want to try it!


----------



## Michael W. Smith (Jun 2, 2002)

emdeengee said:


> This family fled persecution but they so isolated themselves that they missed reality. By 1961 (and even earlier than that) the family could have come out of hiding and entered into a safe environment.


How would they have known to come out of hiding because it was safe? The family went so far into the wilderness, they wanted to guarantee they stayed safe. Once everything was set up - while it might not have been the best set up - why would they risk going back to check on civilization?

I only read (I didn't watch the videos), but you would have to realize the Father made a decision one day to take his family and leave. I don't know if the decision was something that happened real fast or over time - but imagine if the military came to your house today and said "Tomorrow we will be back to take over your land. If you are still here, you and your family WILL be killed."

I would think as soon as the military left, you would grab what you could carry - thinking of what you might need - and take off.

As for living so far out, I'm guessing that either the Father either never wanted to never be found afraid of being persecuted again, or perhaps he wasn't a social guy. Everyone here has said that humans are social creatures, but there are people who would rather just be left alone. And possibly the Father decided to move way out - since they did have children - so society could not "contaminate" his children.

You have to give them credit for being able to live all those years. They might not have thrived, but they still survived.

And talking of Little House on the Prairie books, it's been a while since I read them, but I would imagine a good many pioneers who "went West" ended up dying during the winter - due to illness, starvation, cold.


----------



## o&itw (Dec 19, 2008)

From what I can understand, the growing season was very short. It is a whole lot easier to survive in Missouri, I suspect, than northern Manitoba. Here you would have some kind of fresh vegetation available for about 6 months... in effect, their winter was about 9 months long... That is much longer to go exist with "stored" food, no matter how one stores it. There may also not be much small game in the area. While a colony of people might kill a bear or caribou with sharpened sticks, it would be very hard for one or two men. I imagine the eventual lack of (steel) tools may have been a problem too. We can't assume they had flint or chert there that broke with a sharp edge. How does one even work wood or sharpen a stick with a round piece of rock? Everything would have to be eaten raw, or cooked on a spit. It is amazing that they got though the winter without scurvy or some similar disease.

Even with manual labor, some could do reasonably well if they had tools, pots and pans. Take all that away, and would be very hard to survive a place with 9 month winters. I lived in the upper part of lower Michigan one summer, and the amount of stuff one could grow in a garden was severely limited. Mostly just "spring" crops... potatoes, radishes, cabbage etc. If you had been chased away running for your life... you probably didn't have time to take all the seeds, garden implements, pots, axes, saws you would have considered prudent.


----------



## Limon (Aug 25, 2010)

Bettacreek said:


> THINK.


I do it quite well, thank you very much. You're the one who is trying to equate someone who grew up in modern society but doesn't indulge in all its offerings to a family that grew up in total isolation from the rest of the world. Hysteria and fear are not the same thing. Fear is a healthy reaction; hysteria rarely ends well. 

Humans, by nature, are social creatures. It's one of the reasons why many primitive societies used shunning and outcasting as their harsher punishments. It wasn't just the difficulty for the victim to survive, but lack of contact takes a mental toll on people. People who are well-supplied can still get cabin fever. There were companies that specialized in bringing back homesteaders on the prairie who went insane from lack of human contact. There's a reason humane criminal justice systems limit the use of solitary confinement.

As for the farming skills, they probably weren't very knowledgeable. One of the more idiotic things the communists did when they took over Russia was kill their best farmers. They reasoned that the kulaks - successful farmers - were successful because they exploited their poorer neighbors. They killed them, destroyed their stocks of animals and seeds, and the Soviets suffered for decades because of it. Then there was deliberate starvation of much of their farmers who objected to collectivism. In the 1980s, the Soviets had a big celebration over the fact that for the first time they produced as much food as they had before the revolution. And prior to the revolution, Russia was using techniques and equipment long abandoned by the rest of the West as too inefficient. 

o&itw, yes they were in a very hostile environment. I'm not familiar with the area they ended up, but permafrost is common in Siberia. It's probably why they dried potatoes. They couldn't dig a cellar to store them without them freezing. Not to mention the trouble of digging in permafrost. Between the very short growing season and the extra calories needed in cold weather, it's no surprise they didn't have enough food.


----------



## ChristieAcres (Apr 11, 2009)

What they lacked most was knowledge. With that and their resolve to survive, much more food would have been preserved to sustain them over the harsh Winters and crop failures. 

Many of my family were farmers for generations, also Pioneers who traveled in wagons, some came as far as Washington (Martinson Cabin in Poulsbo, WA, was built by a relative of long ago...). Initially, one couple came over on the Nina, Pinta, or Santa Maria (not sure which one). In those generations, there were also Trappers, Loggers, Miners, and the list goes on. DH's family included a lot of Loggers. They were a tough bunch and passed on the genetics...


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Michael W. Smith said:


> How would they have known to come out of hiding because it was safe? The family went so far into the wilderness, they wanted to guarantee they stayed safe. Once everything was set up - while it might not have been the best set up - why would they risk going back to check on civilization?
> 
> I only read (I didn't watch the videos), but you would have to realize the Father made a decision one day to take his family and leave. I don't know if the decision was something that happened real fast or over time - but imagine if the military came to your house today and said "Tomorrow we will be back to take over your land. If you are still here, you and your family WILL be killed."
> 
> ...


Reconnaissance. Only one had to go.

If it was safe the scout would have returned. If it was unsafe he would have returned or not. 

My father and his friend and his 14 year old son had just enough time to run to the river and swim across. They were shot at as they reached the other side. No chance of hitting them but that did not matter. Together they had the wet clothes they were wearing, a pocket knife, a wallet with nearly no money in it and which was worthless since they could not approach any people, a package of cigarettes and a lighter. It took them 2 months to reach safety. Theirs was a much more dangerous and difficult journey because they actually had people hunting them.

Many pioneers did die. Many pioneers were as completely unprepared for the land they were heading into as this family. I was actually referring to the TV series which was a Saturday Evening Post Norman Rockwell version of pioneer life.


----------



## Bettacreek (May 19, 2012)

Limon said:


> I do it quite well, thank you very much. You're the one who is trying to equate someone who grew up in modern society but doesn't indulge in all its offerings to a family that grew up in total isolation from the rest of the world. Hysteria and fear are not the same thing. Fear is a healthy reaction; hysteria rarely ends well.
> 
> Humans, by nature, are social creatures. It's one of the reasons why many primitive societies used shunning and outcasting as their harsher punishments. It wasn't just the difficulty for the victim to survive, but lack of contact takes a mental toll on people. People who are well-supplied can still get cabin fever. There were companies that specialized in bringing back homesteaders on the prairie who went insane from lack of human contact. There's a reason humane criminal justice systems limit the use of solitary confinement.
> 
> ...


I still don't think you're looking at this suituation. Okay, so let us not use modern day examples. Let's rewind and say you took your family 150 miles into wilderness to escape death, then forty years later, people randomly show up at your house. Remember now, the two children have NEVER seen another human being outside of their tiny family. They've been told the stories of mass murders, I'm sure. Hysteria, fear, whatever, is still NORMAL in this situation. An uncontrollable emotional outburst, after being scared for your life, and you find this abnormal? They didn't curl into a ball shrieking or strips their clothes and run for the hills or start eating their arms off, they were afraid for religious reasons, thought they were going to die. When the scientists settled down and didn't cause further fear, the family came out and interacted with them. I just think you're being unreasonable by thinking that it wasn't a normal reaction in the situation.


----------



## Bettacreek (May 19, 2012)

Read what I wrote. Someone said they were deprived and unstable because the daughter chose to stay. As I said, it wouldn't be any different from telling paw he's deprived and unstable because he refuses to use a cell phone. If you don't like that example, what about amish or mennonites? They choose to live their lifestyle while our's is freely there for the choosing, JUST like the daughter could have easily left with the scientists and didn't. The others chose to leave, just as some amish leave the order. Doesn't mean paw is deprived or unstable for not using a cellie, nor that amish are deprived because they choose to stay with their lifestyle, nor that the daughter was because she decided to stay.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

Michael W. Smith said:


> How would they have known to come out of hiding because it was safe? The family went so far into the wilderness, they wanted to guarantee they stayed safe. Once everything was set up - while it might not have been the best set up - why would they risk going back to check on civilization?
> 
> I only read (I didn't watch the videos), but you would have to realize the Father made a decision one day to take his family and leave. I don't know if the decision was something that happened real fast or over time - but imagine if the military came to your house today and said "Tomorrow we will be back to take over your land. If you are still here, you and your family WILL be killed."
> 
> ...


Um, in Russia there is no "TOMORROW WE WILL COME BACK"

I'll be mean and say that some GROUP (not singling anyone out) evidence of comprehension of history is lacking just a tad. And lot of projection of gently rolling fertile temperate hills onto the taiga.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

Melissa said:


> http://www.amazon.com/Lost-Taiga-Fifty-Year-Religious-Wilderness/dp/0385472099
> 
> There is a book about the family. I just reserved it from my library.


Thanks! I'll do the same thing.

BTW, it's #4,288 on Amazon. Bet this story had a lot to do with it.


----------



## woodsy (Oct 13, 2008)

There are some color pictures at this link, those black and whites didn't do 
much for the location. Same story except the girl who stayed has a newer cabin now.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

There's a discussion about this story on another board I frequent, and someone posted a link to this story. I actually have the movie in my Netflix queue, but it's still on "saved" status.

http://www.coveringmedia.com/movie/2013/01/happy-people-a-year-in-the-taiga.html


----------



## woodsy (Oct 13, 2008)

Melissa said:


> http://www.amazon.com/Lost-Taiga-Fifty-Year-Religious-Wilderness/dp/0385472099
> 
> There is a book about the family. I just reserved it from my library.


That book has doubled in price from this morning when i linked to it about reviews in a earlier post, and thats for used copies.


----------



## Joshie (Dec 8, 2008)

emdeengee said:


> Miscarriges, infant mortality, severely disabled (the result of incest) and lack of development in the males due to malnutrition would have been a very likely outcome and of course this would have been a very big secret. There is also the possibility of infanticide since this would be considered evidence of the sin or to avoid more mouths to feed. It is not like this has not happened before.


I found this article incredibly and disturbingly sad. I would be quite surprised if there was any incest. These people sound very religious. Had there been additional children, it's doubtful all would have died. While congenital defect rates are very high, they're not 100%. Most of these children may have some abnormalities but only 20% to 36% of the children have severe or deadly deformities. 

I realize wikipedia isn't exactly the most reliable but that's where I found this info.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incest


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Being religious does not mean that you are not capable of doing some very nasty things. When it comes down to it who is supposed to be more religious than a priest? 

I also mentioned that - given the horrible malnutrition that these people suffered - failure to conceive and/or miscarriges could also explain the lack of children - as well as infant mortality through birth defects and later on through illness. Not to mention accidents. My friend from Serbia lost one toddler brother when he stumbled into the open fire and a five year old sister who was kicked by a cow. Life is still very primitive in many places around the world and infant mortality very high.


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

There was a comment about the kidney failure regarding the two that died of it and the thought that it could have been the food they were introduced to. I do not think that was likely though. The pneumonia the one died of, most definitely he could have gotten sick from the exposure of being found. 

"There are two types of renal failure: acute and chronic. Acute renal failure occurs suddenly and is usually initiated by underlying causes, for example dehydration, infection, serious injury to the kidney or the chronic use of over the counter pain medications like Tylenol (acetaminophen) or Advil (ibuprofen). Acute renal failure is often reversible with no lasting damage."

*So I figure that any food they may have eaten once found had nothing to do with the Kidney Failure deaths. I think it is very interesting to know why things happen, they did survive 40 years! I think they probably died from the underlying complications to their health by their poor diet and extreme hardship...*

Chronic: I will summarize that this basically happens over time with such things as their diet and illnesses like high blood pressure, Diabetes, Edema etc.

I read more and watched the videos and yes, they did more than originally presented in the article. They grew hemp and made cloth at some point... but never were able to gather enough food fish or hunt I guess to preserve what they needed for the bad months which were about 10 months each year! At some point they were probably too weak to keep up with it all. Imagine how much they would have had to gather? They must not have had the wild edible knowledge to do more. I got to thinking about that! This is very thought provoking to think of to say the least! There are ways to eat in the winter but it sounds quite likely he was just a devout man of faith who did what he thought would save his family from religious prosecution. He did not have more than he grabbed in a hurry. After being next to his brother who was shot, he did take his family right after and go. Apparently he did not know how to hunt so they had to learn as they went along....His daughter has a much nicer accommodation and looked quite adept and serene in the last video. It is a very sad story......


----------



## Lilith (Dec 29, 2012)

While there has been much interesting discussion well worth taking the time to read, I am reminded of what a friend recently posted to Facebook. 

"The moment your mind wonders to the place of "i don't know why they do that" or " i would never do it that way" our mind has wandered into a place of judgment reserved only for God, and we should tred very very lightly!" ~ Brian Brown


----------



## highlands (Jul 18, 2004)

ItchingDuck said:


> I guess that while I understand his decision to leave to save his family, I do not understand him not returning, not checking things out to see if there was still danger once in 40 yrs. I would take my kids and run too.I know that I would certainly check to see if life would be safe were I to return.


Please study Soviet history. The danger went on for nearly half a century at a very high level and longer at a moderate level. The Soviet government killed tens of millions of their own citizens. They destroyed most of the others.


----------



## ItchingDuck (Jan 25, 2012)

highlands said:


> Please study Soviet history. The danger went on for nearly half a century at a very high level and longer at a moderate level. The Soviet government killed tens of millions of their own citizens. They destroyed most of the others.


 
I find your response really rude and insulting. I have refrained from doing this to anyone's opinions. This is my take on it. I do not see the need to do what they did. For right or for wrong. Others did not and yet survived. Your response to my opinion is just something else. My opinion is just that. You do not have to feel the way I do, nor I feel as you do. I do not believe that whwat this family did (the extreme nature of it) was the correct decision. Clearly they felt they had no other choice. Does that mean I agree with it? No. No amount of studying Soviet history will change my mind. My opinions are not yours. It does not make me right or wrong. I thought this was supposed to be a discussion about how we viewed the story. I am sorry you feel the need to make me feel as if I do not know enough to have an opinion.


----------



## woodsy (Oct 13, 2008)

Its kind of ironic isn't it that what some here saw to be a cruel and sad family existence led the surviving girl to want to spend the rest of her life there instead of in civilization ?

Maybe some people are just out of touch with nature.


----------



## Saffron (May 24, 2006)

As far as the reactions upon seeing the "visitors" for the first time.

This of it this way:
You grew up with just your family, you are all "unkempt" in appearance and wear the clothing that is patched and made by hand. One day, visitors arrive who look human but are dressed and groomed very differently, possibly with brighter colored clothing or bundled up in cold weather gear making them look very large - all things you have never seen before. Add to this the fact that you have been told your entire life how your father feared for his life and was afraid he would be killed, possibly even hunted down.
Perhaps their first thought was - they found us and are going to kill us!
That would definitely justify a hysterical reaction, I think.


----------



## ItchingDuck (Jan 25, 2012)

woodsy said:


> Its kind of ironic isn't it that what some here saw to be a cruel and sad family existence led the surviving girl to want to spend the rest of her life there instead of in civilization ?
> 
> Maybe some people are just out of touch with nature.


 
I think I get what you are saying. But I would love nothing more than a cabin in the center of 200 acres... in much milder climate than where these people were. I think the harsh climate is why some might feel sad that she stayed instead of choosing a much more luxurious life. I think she stayed because that is all she knew. Our world had changed too much. Think about 40 years ago...imagine now walking into today's technology after being raised in seclusion. I understand her choice. I really do. It was all she felt comfortable with. I can respect that. I still find this story fascinating. I don't think there is any easy or "right" answer to their dilemma when they fled just as I don't think there was any easy answer to their decisions to stay or leave when they were discovered. Someone brought up a good point before that it took a great amount of courage for them to face the scientists. I may not have been so brave. I would most likely have hid.


----------



## Saffron (May 24, 2006)

Rowenna7 said:


> There has been a lot of debate on the sex question. Only one of the brothers would have even been capable of it. It mentions at one point in the article that Savin castrated himself for religious reasons. Taking that into consideration, I believe that any sex among the children was highly unlikely.


Where did you read that? I went back through the articles I could find and did not see any mention of him being castrated.


----------



## Melissa (Apr 15, 2002)

I think it was a mis-reading of this passage:

_His eldest child, Savin, dealt with this by *casting* himself as the family's unbending arbiter in matters of religion. "He was strong of faith, but a harsh man," his own father said of him, and Karp seems to have worried about what would happen to his family after he died if Savin took control. 
_
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/histo...-of-World-War-II-188843001.html#ixzz2JYyU08uS
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter


----------



## HOTW (Jul 3, 2007)

This is a story of survival, they left civilization and moved multiple times-fleeing from persecution for their religion-untill they found a place remote enough to stop and build a life. I highly doubt they had a wide variety of skills, due to being from a community, and practivced what they knew but considering they had young children it is amazing they didn't die within the first 2 years but the article does not discuss when exactly they settled in the remote area of the Taiga, it just leaves us to assume they spent th eentire 40 years there til discovery. I doubt that is so. They adapted to th ebest of their knowledge, the children were taught to read and write which is remarkable because education is ussully the first thing to go by the wayside when one is trying to survive.

One daughter did leave and she did marry for a brief period but I can imagine how unyielding her religious belief system was and used to following strict religious beleifs she most likely felt out of place/time. People are so used to the fast pace of life they cannot imagine how strange modern convenience must feel to a person who has never heard of such a thing much less lived with it. SHe probably felt only at hime in the wilderness she was raised in-a very different way of life but she does accept visitors so she obviously is a social creature. I can remember the first timeI went to a city as a child and it was pretty scary for me! I cannot imagine how itmust have felt for a grown woman in her 30's//40's!

Religious persecution is very much alive is thie world, but because we live in a country that is so much more advanced we find it hard to beleive that it occurs still. We see it every day when there is talk about the rapes and killing of women in the Middle East and Asia.People still flee their homes ot escape from it. SOmetimes th e only way to survive it is to hide your religion(which has occured many times) in order to live. Much of th e immigration to th e US was due to religious persecution, the Jews, the Irish, have we forgotten history that easily?

Americans tend to not believe something can happen because they close their eyes to it it is encouraged by th esociety as a whole. Yet I see instances of judegmentall the time. I get it from others myself at times. I cannot imagine what it would be like to be working if a field and have your brother shot dead next to you just because of your religion. I can understand why the Father fled with only the basics to survive. Himself his wife and 2 young children does not give you a lot of room to carry essentials!They probably at most had a hand cart to load what thye could take.

Many of us dreamof self suficiency but these people lived the reality of it -survival at any and all costs! Considering they were not raised to live int he wilderness they did not die.Not many people who are self sufficient have riches I think this is a point people don't understand. Self sufficiency is usually a poverty existance tomost people, it is the other things you gain from it that make you rich.

Many Amish nowadays have money because they are no longer self sufficient they work/sell with the "English" and since their homes are not grid tied they do not have th ebills most of us do however if they do not deal with th e outside world with goods/skills they usually have a poverty existance but keep their children fed and clothed- thier dark clothing is dark for a reason, white clothing is reserved for rich people who can afford to keep it bleached clean!

I would love to get my hands on the book because the article gives so little of what must have been a wild ride thru time to lviing like primitive man!


----------



## LittleRedHen (Apr 26, 2006)

I found it admirable and very very sad all at the same time. They spent most of their lives suffering (starving etc) While it beats dieing, it sure wouldn't be a way i'd choose to live by any imagination


----------



## highlands (Jul 18, 2004)

I'm sorry you felt insulted, ItchingDuck. No offense was intended. I am not surprised at the family's isolating themselves from a government that killed tens of millions of its own citizens for no reason other than being different.


----------



## cindy-e (Feb 14, 2008)

ItchingDuck said:


> I find your response really rude and insulting. I have refrained from doing this to anyone's opinions. This is my take on it. I do not see the need to do what they did. For right or for wrong. Others did not and yet survived. Your response to my opinion is just something else. My opinion is just that. You do not have to feel the way I do, nor I feel as you do. I do not believe that whwat this family did (the extreme nature of it) was the correct decision. Clearly they felt they had no other choice. Does that mean I agree with it? No. No amount of studying Soviet history will change my mind. My opinions are not yours. It does not make me right or wrong. I thought this was supposed to be a discussion about how we viewed the story. I am sorry you feel the need to make me feel as if I do not know enough to have an opinion.


My opinion? Perhaps it is true that alot of others did not do what this family did and yet survived. But many who did not do as this family did were summarily executed too. So it is also true that many did not survive. But in his case, he had very good evidence that he, personally, was on the list of people who were going to be killed. They had already killed someone else in his family (his brother). There were strong indicators that for him, it was run or die. So I don't think it was an unwarranted reaction at all. But that's just my opinion, fwiw.


----------



## cindy-e (Feb 14, 2008)

truth? No offense meant at all to those who have held a different POV, but I always wondered if having a B.O.B. was just a little bit reactionary. This story is making me rethink my position on that. I guess there is nothing wrong with having one for every member of the family and hoping you will never need it. =0) It makes me wonder... If we were in this man's shoes, and we knew that we were going to have to flee to a harsh environment, what would we prepare in advance that we could carry with us? Of course, he didn't have the time to think this out. But we do. IDK, what do you think? 
Off the top of my head: 
1) guns are not a good option. eventually you run out of bullets. But you can always make more arrows if you know how. So a very good bow might be in order. I suppose you could take a gun and ammo, but only use it in extreme circumstances. 
2) a good knife for cleaning anything you catch. String of some sort to make a drying rack for the carcasses once you get there. 
3) an ax to fell trees to make stuff with,and a chisel, and a plane.
4) seeds that reseed, the head of a hoe, the head of a shovel. (you can make the handle, I would guess.) Wire for making barrels and crocks to preserve stuff in after you freeze dry it. 
5) Nails for however long they would last would be good at first.
6) packable camping gear, cookware and etc, tents, sleeping bags rated for extreme temperatures. flint or some consistent way to make a fire.
7) a few changes of clothes, some cloth, a pair of scissors and a needle and thread. 
8) of course, temporary rations of food, and those tablets to purify water. 

That's all I can think of off of the top of my head. =0) I'm not expecting our gov't to run amok killing random citizens anytime soon, but I think there are some external volitile political situations that could impact us in the future. Something to think about. 
K. FWIW,
Cindyc.


----------



## salmonslayer (Jan 4, 2009)

Thats a whole other subject there Cindy, whew. I have always looked at a bug out bag as more of a short term "gotta get out of here for a while" deal in case of natural disaster, fire, civil unrest etc.

If something happened like the Bolshevik revolution I would send my family as far away or to as safe a place as I could and then I would fight as a partisan. I would rather go out with a bang than live in fear under tyranny....and before anyone goes there, I do not consider us even remotely close to that right now nor do I have any fear we will ever get there in my lifetime.


----------



## HOTW (Jul 3, 2007)

cindy I think they did prepare for what could happen but eventualy the steel wore down and thye didnt have hte skills to replace things! A lot of the ways they cooked could have been adapted, using heated stones to heat water/stews etc but if you dont know you can do this it wont work you can even cook a stew over a fie in animal skins but I tthink they used what thye could kill for clothing and bedding. They had a spinning wheel and a loom so they could make cloth from th ehemp. Thye obvious had seed but a late frost killed at their rye planting. There is no way anyone can prepare for a future without modern things but they obviously made do and I think that was incredible considering where they were!

salmonslayer if you lived under th eBolsevics and sent your family somewhere how could you know they were safe? It wasnt easy to just run away strangers were stopped an dquestioned and quite often never seen again. Its hard to understand how it was because we don't face that. Even here in the US many people have no clue what it is truly like ot experience war. My mum grew up in [email protected] and she can remember at 2 chasing the chickens into th epen when the sirens went off even her Dad was amazed she could remember but she described to him the Anderson shelter where it was and where the chicken pen was and they moved from that house when she was not quite 3.I watched 1940's House with her a few months ago and when she saw the Anderson shelter it gave her quite a shiver she hadnt seen one since th ewar and it made a lot of memories flood back!


----------



## salmonslayer (Jan 4, 2009)

HOTW said:


> cindy I think they did prepare for what could happen but eventualy the steel wore down and thye didnt have hte skills to replace things! A lot of the ways they cooked could have been adapted, using heated stones to heat water/stews etc but if you dont know you can do this it wont work you can even cook a stew over a fie in animal skins but I tthink they used what thye could kill for clothing and bedding. They had a spinning wheel and a loom so they could make cloth from th ehemp. Thye obvious had seed but a late frost killed at their rye planting. There is no way anyone can prepare for a future without modern things but they obviously made do and I think that was incredible considering where they were!
> 
> salmonslayer if you lived under th eBolsevics and sent your family somewhere how could you know they were safe? It wasnt easy to just run away strangers were stopped an dquestioned and quite often never seen again. Its hard to understand how it was because we don't face that. Even here in the US many people have no clue what it is truly like ot experience war. My mum grew up in [email protected] and she can remember at 2 chasing the chickens into th epen when the sirens went off even her Dad was amazed she could remember but she described to him the Anderson shelter where it was and where the chicken pen was and they moved from that house when she was not quite 3.I watched 1940's House with her a few months ago and when she saw the Anderson shelter it gave her quite a shiver she hadnt seen one since th ewar and it made a lot of memories flood back!


 I was making more of a reference to modern times in the USA not the 1920s Russia where they had little opportunity for travel. Part of my family fled Germany in the 1930s and you do what you have to do but I cant see myself leaving my country, this country, for any reason.

I come from a family of immigrants so we dont have a long history in this country (1930s on both sides of my family) and my wife is naturalized but the interesting thing for me is that I have very mixed feelings towards those who would leave the United States and give up their citizenship. Its non-sensical from the standpoint of my family origins and I dont feel the same way when people leave other countries to immigrate here but its just the way I feel. Time have also changed on the family dynamic, I have a daughter that lives in interior Alaska, a son stationed in the Air Force in Anchorage, another son living for the time being in a coastal city in SE Alaska, one son who drives long haul and is all over the country and another son who lives in NC. Gathering up my brood and hiding wouldnt be an option in a SHTF scenario and I suspect I am not the only one in that situation on this board.

The vast distances in Siberia itself are hard to imagine. I had the opportunity to travel to Magadan on the sea of Okhotsk and we first had to fly to Moscow and then get another plane to Magadan and I think it was something like 12 hours of flying over literally nothing but wilderness. 

When I was stationed in Mongolia I was on the edge of the Taiga but above tree line so there were no forests and its hard to convey cold and desolate but here are a couple of pictures.




























I was close to the Russian border about 120km from Ulan Bataar and the temps ranged from 50 below zero (without wind chill) for long stretches of time in the winter to average highs in the low 50s during the summer. It was extremely hard to grow anything not indigenous to the area, there was wild life but the density per square mile due to the vastness of the area and lack of forage was very low, and all the comments about how they obviously didnt know how to forage for edibles just shows a complete lack of understanding of the area. When I would venture into the forested Altai mountains we would find berries in season but the berries were not the abundant crops your used to in more temperate climates and the season might last a couple of weeks at best. In Missouri I could sustain myself with the bounty to be had naturally, in the Taiga it would be extremely difficult.

My admiration and awe of what these people did is obviously colored by my own experience in both in Siberia and Mongolia but break out a map, check some distances between cities and the lack of roads in that area and then try to picture laying that over your state. Its really a fascinating story of perseverance and I know I couldnt do it.


----------



## pigpen5659 (Jul 22, 2006)

Here's a link to a very interesting site about Russia. 

I found this site A few years ago and viewed numerous videos online about driving in eastern Russia, quite hair raising considering the state of the roads, or lack of roads in the sense we know. Extrapolate that a lot of us have very little ideas what it is like to even live somewhere where dirt roads are relatively well maintained or even not common any more and then go back to Russia in the 30's... to travel under those conditions is not realistic by our standards today... Lots to consider and think about relative our perceptions and expectations. Including the knowledge we all think we have. 

http://russiatrek.org/blog/

Lots of interesting view points and ways of looking at this situation and we have time to "war game" our position out and think of what we would do or not do. Definitely a learning experience.


----------



## NamasteMama (Jul 24, 2009)

ItchingDuck said:


> I found that story deeply disturbing. That paranoia and mental illness (imo) led the adults to put the families lives in jeopardy and ultimately crippled what could have been wonderful fully functional members of society.
> 
> On a side not- I am totally amazed that they survived for so long. I cannot imagine.


Paranoia ? Yet the pilgrims who came over to America and starved to death for religious freedom are celebrated every thanksgiving? Or do you think the pilgrims were mentally ill too?:grumble:

Pretty rude for a newbie too.


----------



## rockhound (Sep 25, 2009)

Interesting to be sure. I can't help but wonder how much better off they could have been if they had had more warning and more time to prepare for the isolation. More metal tools and knives, hunting/fishing gear and seeds would have made it a real paradise except for the fear of being found.


----------



## "SPIKE" (Dec 7, 2011)

It's cold here this morning, so I have been looking around on the forum and came across this.
I read all the comments then went back and read the story. LOL

WOW! What a testament to humans will to survive!

Never judge a person until you have walked in their shoes or on their path.
No wonder I hate extreme government!
No wonder I hate extreme religion!
I sure hope the world can get its act together before many of us have to try to live in extreme conditions anywhere near this. Not many could survive.
Knowledge is good and isolation is not all bad.

Just a few thought that came to mind.

SPIKE


----------



## MamaTiger (Jun 11, 2008)

I didn't find the reference to one son castrating himself either. I also couldn't find the info given about one dd leaving and marrying for a brief tiime. Can anyone point me to where I can find that info?


----------



## Mary Moon (Jan 21, 2013)

What I got from this story was how religion can ruin lives. 

These people lived on the edge of death for decades. Sure, the government chasing them was to fault in a big way but, remove the religion as a factor, and chances are they would have lived out relatively normal lives even under the USSR's hammer.

Faith kept them alive, one would assume if their religion was worth it's salt, they would have thrived or at least lived far better.

I found nothing admirable about their faith or their suffering. I found it sad and pitiful that faith failed them so terribly.

The only thing I found amazing was the physical stamina it must have taken to endure the decades of torture under a total lack of common sense and lack of adaptability.

From what I read, they all lived in more fear of their own religion than the government.


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

I think it is terrific. If you notice those that died did so shortly after having contact with the geologists...for 40 years before that they were fine. That is no coincidence. Clearly they became infected with something that they had no immunity for regardless of the speculation of the author.

I don't think it was a life that was sad, but one that was triumphant. They have proven, beyond all doubt, that we are NOT dependent upon the 'collective', the government, society, insurance policies, etc, etc. ( although many of us knew that already ). I do not believe that there experience was a sad one, no more than your average suburban kid who has a lot of material junk but has never had to be independent, never knew the empowerment of self reliance or the true potential of the individual.

This story has renewed my belief in independence, individualism, and rejection of the creeping dependency that now permiates everything.


----------



## mamita (May 19, 2008)

Mary Moon said:


> What I got from this story was how religion can ruin lives.
> 
> These people lived on the edge of death for decades. Sure, the government chasing them was to fault in a big way but, remove the religion as a factor, and chances are they would have lived out relatively normal lives even under the USSR's hammer.
> 
> ...


again that is the interesting thought to this article. you felt they lived in more fear of their own religion than their government. wow. I can't even post a reply beyond.....wow.


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

Mary Moon said:


> What I got from this story was how religion can ruin lives.
> 
> These people lived on the edge of death for decades. Sure, the government chasing them was to fault in a big way but, remove the religion as a factor, and chances are they would have lived out relatively normal lives even under the USSR's hammer.
> 
> ...


Edge of death?? The old man lived into his 90's...no health insurance, no government dependency. Awesome, they were an inspiration.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Mary Moon said:


> What I got from this story was how religion can ruin lives.
> 
> 
> 
> From what I read, they all lived in more fear of their own religion than the government.


Tell that to the Armenians, Native Americans, Blacks before the civil rights movement, Tutsis, etc etc etc. People seem to delight in killing "the other guy"- religion is an excuse most of the time , not a cause. 

The Soviet Union under Stalin or Germany under Hitler or China under Mao will show how well a "non-religion" fares in the world. Millions died for other reasons than religion.


----------



## cindy-e (Feb 14, 2008)

and BTW, many, many people fled for reasons that had nothing to do with religion; i.e. simply because they could not condone, participate in, or sit by and watch what was happening. Many people fled, or were killed simply because they made the wrong political "friends" in an earlier time of peace. Many were simply associated with the wrong people by the accident of their birth, and were not political or religious at all, and yet thier lives were at risk. His decision happened to be religious, but in his situation, in his time, he could just as easily have been running because a military group was ransacking his neighborhood due to unpopular affluence, because his son or father was a part of an unpopular political group, or because he was not willing to turn on or turn in someone else and he was given the choice to do so or die. these things were happening too! His not being religious wouldn't have made him safer, or made his choices eaiser. that was not the world he lived in. It was not so simple that we can use his story to issue summary judgement on organized religion. 
JM2CFWIW.
Cindyc.


----------



## Michael W. Smith (Jun 2, 2002)

wyld thang said:


> Um, in Russia there is no "TOMORROW WE WILL COME BACK"
> I'll be mean and say that some GROUP (not singling anyone out) evidence of comprehension of history is lacking just a tad. And lot of projection of gently rolling fertile temperate hills onto the taiga.


I'll be the first to admit my history is lacking - but I was saying what if YOU were told TODAY (in the U.S.) - "we will be back tomorrow, if you are still here, you will die".

These people hurriedly grabbed what they had, what they thought they would need, and what they could carry. I highly doubt they ever thought their journey and isolation was going to be for a half century. 

It sounds like they moved several times, and I'm guessing society kept intruding on them, so they moved WAY OUT.

To survive that long (let alone the cold and lack of food) for years without doctors or medicine is amazing. Any cut or puncture could have easily got infected.


----------



## salmonslayer (Jan 4, 2009)

cindy-e said:


> *JM2CFWIW*.
> Cindyc.


 Ahhhh a new one to add to my limited yet growing repertoire!


----------



## lexa (Mar 30, 2012)

ItchingDuck said:


> I found that story deeply disturbing. That paranoia and mental illness (imo) led the adults to put the families lives in jeopardy and ultimately crippled what could have been wonderful fully functional members of society.
> 
> On a side not- I am totally amazed that they survived for so long. I cannot imagine.


They escaped persecution brought on by Stalin not paranoia or mental illness like you think. For them the danger was very real. There was an anti- religious compain from 1928-1941.
My husbands grandmother who died last year spent part of her childhood living in the dugout shelter in the forest with her parents and 4 siblings. Her family was not religious but instead her mother somehow related to the Zar's court and her best friend was Zarina's Fraulein, so it made their family part of the "opposition". They first fled from Leningrad to Astrahan when Purges began and when it became dangerous there they moved to a a village on Volga. When war started her father was able to find a job on a small manufacturing plant that did something for war effort. He had a sought after profession so no one asked him where he was from. After war it became safe for them and they were able to build a house in the village.


----------



## Mary Moon (Jan 21, 2013)

Ugh... forget I said anything. I should have known better.


----------



## woodsy (Oct 13, 2008)

Picked up the book at the library today, was sent in from another library not local.

Am going to enjoy this read, House on the Taiga, LOL. 

Thats not the title but you get what i mean..

Think i will get lost in the Taiga for the next few days, I'll check back with some truths on occasion, not speculation. 

The author is quite renown in Russia.


----------



## Backwoods Bill (Jan 23, 2013)

I get what Mary is saying but, you have to keep in mind this was back in the 20's (?) and these are fundamentalist Russian Orthodox, who still talk about Peter The Great like he's alive. Even at the best of times, these people were wrapped up in a seriously warped religion. They would have been living this way even in the best of times before they fled. Better digs and tools but still, living the fundamentalist Orthodox way. Plus that was a different time none of us can really get a mental grip on, it was a different world.

In our modern frame of reference, sure we can fault religion for part of their harsh life, but we don't grasp the degree of that like we can't grasp the extremes of many faiths. These people were frozen in time, and society and knowledge had no influence on them. I find it a pity and sad also but a fascinating window into the past. 

You have a harsh liberal view of the world Mary, but I actually agree with you. fundamentalist orthodoxy is the root cause of a lot of woes, but then again, if the USSR had just left them alone, their lives probably would not have been much different. Isolation, little outside contact, and harsh indoctrination of their children would have been the norm anyway.

As for the idea they lived longer due to it, sans doctors and modern comforts, read the above. Many of these ultra orthodox sects shun modern medicine, foods, and technology and also live long healthy lives. Good genes? Who knows.

I seriously think there is so much more to this story and these people's reason for fleeing into the wilderness that discussion of it pas the face value of the story is pointless. The internet only feeds you the tasty 3% of every story.


----------



## woodsy (Oct 13, 2008)

From initial readings in the book, what Backwoods Bill posted above holds a lot of water.
Its not like they were new to this sort of lifestyle on the run to remote places , their fathers and their fathers before them probably likely experienced the same type of persecution. 
They were actually quite adept at living off the land with little worldly goods beyond the 
very necessary items and tools.
The smithsonian article left out much of what wasn't sensational of course.
The year the mother died of starvation was the worst gardening season they had in more than 20 years they had been there. Hardly any crops survived due to late snows and frost but they foraged
off the land and the remainder of the family made do to the next season when the crops were bountiful. They also grew turnip ,peas and foraged for wild onions among other things which i don't recall the article mentioning.


----------



## Bettacreek (May 19, 2012)

It's odd. I'm athiest, but didn't really look at the religious part of it so much. Not blaming the religion or thinking it saved them. They saved themselves. Adaptability? I'm sorry, but if you can run away and survive for 40 years, that's adaptability at its finest. Maybe they didn't have a perfect little shack, but they adapted to it. Maybe they didn't have the best of anything, but they adapted and survived. I don't believe that they starved the entire 40 years either. I'd be willing to bet they had hard times, but also that most of the time, they had it better than most are assuming. You don't survive for forty years eating shoes and bark. Yes, it might've been rough some years, but not every year.


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

Wow, what an amazing story! These verses come to mind from the Bible and I'm sure they knew them well. There is a happy ending to the story!


> Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please _Him_, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and _that_ He is a rewarder of those who seek Him. 7 By faith Noah, being warned _by God_ about things not yet seen, in reverence prepared an ark for the salvation of his household, by which he condemned the world, and became an heir of the righteousness which is according to faith. 8 By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed by going out to a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was going. 9 By faith he lived as an alien in the land of promise, as in a foreign _land_, dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, fellow heirs of the same promise; 10 for he was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God. 11 By faith even Sarah herself received ability to conceive, even beyond the proper time of life, since she considered Him faithful who had promised. 12 Therefore there was born even of one man, and him as good as dead at that, _as many descendants_ as the stars of heaven in number, and innumerable as the sand which is by the seashore.
> 
> 
> 13 All these died in faith, without receiving the promises, but having seen them and having welcomed them from a distance, and having confessed that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. 14 For those who say such things make it clear that they are seeking a country of their own. 15 And indeed if they had been thinking of that _country_ from which they went out, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 But as it is, they desire a better _country_, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God; for He has prepared a city for them...
> ...


----------



## mountainlaurel (Mar 5, 2010)

The Russian Mennonites faced persecution there as well. They also lived in colonies and had huge farms that were confiscated by the Soviets and then they were thrown off the land.

Many were able to migrate to Canada, Mexico, Paraguay and the western US. If you see Hutterites, I believe that is more common to how they lived in Russia than how the Menno churches in the Eastern US live. 

I understand, that for the one who didn't flee persecution, well, there are no more Russian Mennonites, so perhaps that is what this family was trying to avoid.


----------



## vicki in NW OH (May 10, 2002)

Another thing to consider is that in the Orthodox faith (and Catholic), although it is not as common now and a practice not understood by others, especially in America, some are called by God to live as hermits. I was kind of reading for a bit on an Eastern Christian message board, and this is what they consider this family to be, or at least what they call the last family member, an old ritualist hermit. 

As far as religious persecution by the Soviets, research what they did to the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. The persecution was brutal. The Church basically went underground to survive.


----------



## primal1 (Aug 22, 2003)

I have no trouble seeing what they were able to do as a complete success, barring of course the eventual death of the family line. These people lived exactly like the first settlers in America, very few of them came here totally prepared for what they found. Most were leaving Europe to escape some kind of persecution(not just religious), a chance at a new life, land, money... I work on primitive canadian/Quebec furniture and their home was fitted with pretty much exactly what early settlers had, the very basics. Many many early settlers did not survive. I actually thought they looked quite healthy in the pictures and video which i didn't expect after reading the short article... amazing!


----------



## woodsy (Oct 13, 2008)

Not being much of a religious scholar like some others here I will post this link for those interested
giving a brief overview of the Russian orthodox and Old believer history from the mid 1600s to present day. 
I never knew such strict religious beliefs existed pertaining to worldly goods before reading the book about the family 
and this is what the Lykov family in the story lived by.
For example no foods in cans, bottles or boxes could be consumed, no matches to start fires with, only flint could be used, practically anything man made except the bare essentials was taboo.


http://www.ohs.org/education/oregonhistory/historical_records/dspDocument.cfm?doc_ID=764E6BED-FFC4-C034-9A5563F41CE37080

Won't say too much about the books details at this time as some others are and may want to read it, most libraries have or can get it. 

Fascinating reading about surviving on the bare essentials in a sometimes unforgiving environment with no outside help UNTIL they were discovered
in 1978 . "We cannot have that " was a common answer to goods that were offered by the outside.

The author visited the family for many years gathering information about them, their religious beliefs and how they survived as long as they had.

Recommended reading for the survivalist types.


----------



## fffarmergirl (Oct 9, 2008)

This is the most interesting thread I've read in a long time!

My ex husband's family was Ukranian and escaped from the Ukrane during that time and somehow got to Canada. They left after government officials nailed the father figure to his front door, set the house on fire and burned him to death because of the family's religious beliefs. I didn't read up a whole lot on that time period but I remember my ex referring to it as the "pogramme". He said it was a less-publicized holocaust.

If these were jews who had escaped the Nazis and run into the woods - would it be easier for people to understand why they never went back? It's the same thing.

Even after my ex's parents came to the United States, they were persecuted. During the McCarthy era his father was put in jail for putting shingles on his roof on the 4th of July. They said that meant he was a communist.

People's preoccupation with the sexuality of this family got me thinking about Lot, in the Bible. Remember, after they fled, he and his 2 daughters had to survive in a cave for so long that the daughters were certain they would never meet men and be able to marry? Out of desparation they got Lot drunk and seduced him so they could have his children (At least that was HIStory. I wonder what HERstory would say about that!) It's off topic, just got me thinking. 

I'm imagining myself in the place of the mother of this Russian family. I think I'd rather just let myself be killed than have to live through the ordeal she lived through, and then die with your children still in the wilderness with no hope of returning to civilization. I wonder how many times she wished they would have been killed.


----------



## woodsy (Oct 13, 2008)

Anyone else read the book yet ?

Somehow food tastes better and the house feels warmer after reading it.
Oh, the shower and soap, what a luxury !


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

I just finished the book today. Quite an interesting story, and this family DID have some very minimal contact with outsiders during the 40 years of their isolation. Most of it was with hunters and trappers, although there was one incident around 1945 where they crossed paths with some members of the military. Interesting that they were not arrested or turned in.

One glaring omission throughout the book is that there is no mention of latrines or how they managed other aspects of sanitation.


----------



## Michael W. Smith (Jun 2, 2002)

I had gone to our local library and asked if they had the book. No, they did not. However, they got it on inter-library loan and I just finished it today.

WOW!

It is an amazing story! The majority of the book is about Karp (the father) and Agafia (the daughter) although it does cover the whole family.

Their belief and faith were amazing! "We are not allowed this." was spoken by the family ALL the time. Things that they needed or would make their lives much easier, they denied themselves because their belief and faith were that strong.

(Although it seems as time went on, both Karp and Agafia allowed more and more "worldly" things to come into their lives. )For instance, matches. Initially when they were offered matches, they refused them. But towards the end of the book (after Karp had died), Agafia did use matches - to light candles. However, to light the fire for cooking food - she ALWAYS used flint.

Karp died 02/16/88 - exactly 27 years after his wife died. Agafia had noticed beforehand, that Karp was getting confused. On 02/15 he kept trying to go outside and had fallen just outside the door of their house. Agafia dragged him back into his bed. Later, he tried going out the door again. Agafia pulled him back into the house and back in bed again. "Falling asleep to her father's snores and wheezes, Agafia woke to the silence of dawn with a start: "I ran over, and he was cold.""

Agafia then had to go 25 kilometers through the snow which took about 8 hours to get to the geologists' camp for help. She arrived sick and for the next 3 days rested in bed at the camp.

They let the authorities know, and on January 19, the authorities arrived at the camp by helicopter, picked up Algafia and went to her and her father's house. "The prosecutor and head of the militia kept the formalities to a minimum. They examined the deceased and wrote in their report: "After lying there for three days, the corpse has had it's arm eaten by the starving cats.""

One amazing story is about after Karp had passed away and Agafia had got a dog, the one time a gray dog showed up around her house. She thought it was a wolf and grabbed the gun and shot at it. She missed, but it just stood there. Agafia's dog then went running up to it and bit it on the snout, and it did nothing. Within a few days, both dogs were running around together and Agafia even fed it. At this point Agafia assumed the gray dog was some dog that became lost and had somehow come across her hourse and stayed.

The gray dog stayed there for 6 weeks until finally a hunter had come around to check on Agafia and shot it. IT WAS A WOLF!!!!!!!!!

Towards the end of the book, (and even before Karp passed away), they needed help from the geologist's and others to get their crops in. This assistance increased and after Karp's death it increased even more as several times Agafia fell ill and needed help.

What is truly amazing is that even after their story became public and their relatives were found "in the world" and even came to see Karp and Agafia and invited them to come live with them, they refused. (Well, Karp did. I think Agafia would have gone but she listened to her father.) Relatives visited several times and invited them to just visit with them. At this point Agafia disobeyed her father and actually went with the relatives to see "the world", but it was not too her liking and she happily returned to her father. But even after his death, Agafia refused to leave saying that "He did not give his blessing." and while she did visit several different places, she always came back home to the Taiga, and has continued to live there to this day.

What is truly inspiring again, is their belief and faith. Their religion "would not allow it" and they passed it up. Look at today's world. 60, 70, and 80 years ago, the religious family "rested" on Sundays and did no work. Sundays was truly for resting and for prayer and bible study and reading. Today, (and I'm as guilty as anyone else), Sunday is just another day.

This is a great book to read, and I urge everyone to go out to your local library and read it (and if they don't have it, they can get it for you through inter-library loan.

Oddly enough, as thesedays mentions, there is no mention of going to the bathroom. One has to wonder what exactly they did.

There is mention in the book though, of the two brothers living in a cabin to themselves, and Karp and the two daughters living in another one. The family never actually came out and said why this was, but the author of the book suspects it was to avoid incest between the brothers and sisters.


----------



## Cindy in NY (May 10, 2002)

Michael - I didn't read your post because I'm reading the book and didn't want to spoil it!!


----------



## ginnie5 (Jul 15, 2003)

I just put this on hold.....Looks interesting. The thing I always wonder though when I hear something like this....a way of life that is deemed by society to not be ok.....a way of life that will be improved by modern conveniences....is why? They apparently didn't want to change. So why if they were content is it right to make them change because it doesn't fit our ideas?


----------



## belladulcinea (Jun 21, 2006)

Ginnie, I so agree. This is one of those times that they were not wrong just different. And heaven knows the world can't abide anyone being different! That's why there are so many in this world who want to control others. 

I need to check this book out.


----------



## highlands (Jul 18, 2004)

> The gray dog stayed there for 6 weeks until finally a hunter had come around to check on Agafia and shot it. IT WAS A WOLF!!!!!!!!!


Technically dogs and wolves are the same species, just different breeds. Just like a Greyhound is a different breed than a Doberman. There was an interesting article about this in National Geographic (I think) where the showed the spectrum and how close each breed was to each other.

Scientist used to classify dogs and wolves as separate breeds but recently (last 15 years) revised that so they are all in the same species. Some sources are up to date on this and others not. They all interbreed and produce viable fertile offspring.

Thanks for the book review. Sounds very interesting!


----------



## Michael W. Smith (Jun 2, 2002)

highlands said:


> Technically dogs and wolves are the same species, just different breeds. Just like a Greyhound is a different breed than a Doberman. There was an interesting article about this in National Geographic (I think) where the showed the spectrum and how close each breed was to each other.
> 
> Scientist used to classify dogs and wolves as separate breeds but recently (last 15 years) revised that so they are all in the same species. Some sources are up to date on this and others not. They all interbreed and produce viable fertile offspring.


Yeah . . . . . . . . . . but . . . . . . . her dog was male and so was the wolf! Also, at first she thought it was a wolf, but then when she shot at it and it just stood there - she started to think "No, that can't be a wolf." So within a couple of days, she was thinking it was just a dog and would just go about her business outside - walking down to the river, feeding the animals, etc. I'm not quite sure what kind of animal enclosure they had for the goats - but it didn't mess with them. At one point, she even tried to set a trap so she could catch it and get up close to it. (Luckily the wolf wasn't interested in her baited traps!)


----------



## Michael W. Smith (Jun 2, 2002)

Cindy in NY said:


> Michael - I didn't read your post because I'm reading the book and didn't want to spoil it!!


Glad you didn't read my report of the book then! I guess I should have put a warning at the beginning. It's just a very interesting book and think it would be a good book to read.

They certainly lived a different life. You can argue all you want that it wasn't fair to the family to put them through all the hunger and doing without. But even being raised out there, the kids were still taught how to write and read so they still got an education. And even though Agafia did get out to see some of the "world" - she refuses to leave the Tiaga. (Partly because the world doesn't "worry about their souls" as she does, and I think partly because her father never gave "his blessing" for her to leave.)


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

I am sorry the wolf was shot. I am glad Agafia is content in her home.


----------



## michiganfarmer (Oct 15, 2005)

WOW! very interesting


----------



## Freya (Dec 3, 2005)

Is she still alive today?


I am HORRIBLY curious now to see some sort of list of what items they actually fled with. I doubt there is one, but the fact they took a spinning wheel and loom parts fascinates me. I assume they were on foot? Those two items aren't "small" and compact. It really makes me wonder what they actually left with? :nerd::shrug:


Did the book go into it? I will have to see if my library can get it.


----------



## vicki in NW OH (May 10, 2002)

Found these links on an Eastern Christian forum:

http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=10192

http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=10234

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyQIGgeeYno&playnext=1&list=PL3E8618B6685175C7&feature=results_main[/ame]


----------

