Eesti etnograafid lõunavepsa külades 1965–1969

Indrek Jääts
{"title":"Eesti etnograafid lõunavepsa külades 1965–1969","authors":"Indrek Jääts","doi":"10.33302/ermar-2018-002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Estonian ethnographers in southern Vepsian villages, 1965–1969\n\nEstonian ethnographers have taken an interest in Finno-Ugric peoples since the dawn of ethnography, and to the extent possible, they have made trips to the regions in question to study their culture. Starting in the 1960s, the State Ethnography Museum of the Estonian SSR in Tartu (the past and present Estonian National Museum) became the hub of Finno-Ugric ethnography under its director, Aleksei Peterson. Expeditions to the linguistic relatives in the east began at the initiative and with the support of linguists (chiefly, Paul Ariste) and continued in later years independently. \nThe article looks at five expeditions made by Estonian ethnographers to southern Vepsian villages in the years 1965–1969. The central source is the fieldwork diaries maintained on the expeditions. In addition, the article examines the photographs, film footage and drawings from these expeditions, along with collected items and ethnographic descriptions. The scholarly and popular science-oriented texts based on the material acquired on the expeditions and coverage of the expeditions in the Estonian media of that era are analysed. Interviews were conducted with a few of the people who took part in the trips. \nThe southern Veps region was poorly connected with the rest of the world in the 1960s, and the people there led quite an isolated existence. For this reason, the villages in the region had an abundance of extant or only recently defunct aspects (such as slash and burn agriculture, dugout canoe construction or use of twigs to heat the stove), which captivated the ethnologists. The southern Veps region was a unique window to the past for Estonian researchers, who in that period dealt with questions of ethnogenesis. The material culture had received little study and Peterson saw this as his calling and an opportunity. Modernisation was already under way and everything old was at risk of fading. Ethnographers interested in these matters had to hurry to save for science what could be salvaged. The traditional peasant culture of the Vepsians was documented using still cameras and film cameras, ethnographic interviews were conducted, ethnographic drawings prepared, and artefacts were collected with great verve. Quantity was important, and the field work was generally a collective pursuit – many people could after all accomplish more than just one. \nThe material recorded in the course of fieldwork reached academic circulation quite rapidly – presentations were delivered at international conferences, and journal articles were published. The coverage of the expeditions in the Estonian media was quite lively as well. Newspapers published accounts of various lengths and on at least once occasion the ethnographers’ activities in the Vepsian region was discussed on television. Estonian scholars perceived and conveyed the southern Veps villages as some kind of Baltic-Finnic fairy tale land. In general, researchers relished the opportunity to go on an expedition. It was felt that this was a noble thing, which in some sense also tied in with the Estonian national cause. Research into the linguistic relatives was positively received by Estonian society for this reason – i.e. it was linked to the national identity. \nLocal authorities in the destination regions generally took a positive attitude toward the ethnographers. The zeitgeist favoured science and expeditions. The Veps people – especially those in more remote and isolated villages – frequently greeted the Estonian ethnographers with initial scepticism. The Estonians had to explain their objectives and use documents to prove their bona fides. Later the alienation dissipated and once the close kinship of the Vepsian and Estonian languages was revealed, the newcomers received a rapturous reception as if they were long-lost relatives. At Sodjärv Lake, which served on multiple occasions as the ethnographers’ base camp, Estonian researchers became accepted by the Vepsians as their own people. \nIt is difficult to gauge precisely the influence that those and later expeditions had on the Vepsian peoples. The Estonians’ visits probably helped to bolster the generally weak self-identity of the Veps people. While the Russians in the region all too often took a supercilious view of the Veps and their language, the ethnographers from Estonia had come to study them precisely because of their identity and held in high regard everything from old peasant culture to the language. Some local people still speak positively about Estonians.\nThe five expeditions to the villages of the southern Vepsian region discussed in this article, their outcome and resonance make up a key part of a cultural current that sprang from Finno-Ugric studies in Soviet Estonia, the best-known examples of which are Lennart Meri’s ethnographic documentary films, the choral music of Veljo Tormis and the graphic art of Kaljo Põllu. Emphasising their Finno-Ugric roots was for Estonians an additional way to express their Estonian identity independent of Soviet rule and ethnographers made a significant contribution to this trend.","PeriodicalId":307696,"journal":{"name":"Eesti Rahva Muuseumi aastaraamat","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eesti Rahva Muuseumi aastaraamat","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33302/ermar-2018-002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Estonian ethnographers in southern Vepsian villages, 1965–1969 Estonian ethnographers have taken an interest in Finno-Ugric peoples since the dawn of ethnography, and to the extent possible, they have made trips to the regions in question to study their culture. Starting in the 1960s, the State Ethnography Museum of the Estonian SSR in Tartu (the past and present Estonian National Museum) became the hub of Finno-Ugric ethnography under its director, Aleksei Peterson. Expeditions to the linguistic relatives in the east began at the initiative and with the support of linguists (chiefly, Paul Ariste) and continued in later years independently. The article looks at five expeditions made by Estonian ethnographers to southern Vepsian villages in the years 1965–1969. The central source is the fieldwork diaries maintained on the expeditions. In addition, the article examines the photographs, film footage and drawings from these expeditions, along with collected items and ethnographic descriptions. The scholarly and popular science-oriented texts based on the material acquired on the expeditions and coverage of the expeditions in the Estonian media of that era are analysed. Interviews were conducted with a few of the people who took part in the trips. The southern Veps region was poorly connected with the rest of the world in the 1960s, and the people there led quite an isolated existence. For this reason, the villages in the region had an abundance of extant or only recently defunct aspects (such as slash and burn agriculture, dugout canoe construction or use of twigs to heat the stove), which captivated the ethnologists. The southern Veps region was a unique window to the past for Estonian researchers, who in that period dealt with questions of ethnogenesis. The material culture had received little study and Peterson saw this as his calling and an opportunity. Modernisation was already under way and everything old was at risk of fading. Ethnographers interested in these matters had to hurry to save for science what could be salvaged. The traditional peasant culture of the Vepsians was documented using still cameras and film cameras, ethnographic interviews were conducted, ethnographic drawings prepared, and artefacts were collected with great verve. Quantity was important, and the field work was generally a collective pursuit – many people could after all accomplish more than just one. The material recorded in the course of fieldwork reached academic circulation quite rapidly – presentations were delivered at international conferences, and journal articles were published. The coverage of the expeditions in the Estonian media was quite lively as well. Newspapers published accounts of various lengths and on at least once occasion the ethnographers’ activities in the Vepsian region was discussed on television. Estonian scholars perceived and conveyed the southern Veps villages as some kind of Baltic-Finnic fairy tale land. In general, researchers relished the opportunity to go on an expedition. It was felt that this was a noble thing, which in some sense also tied in with the Estonian national cause. Research into the linguistic relatives was positively received by Estonian society for this reason – i.e. it was linked to the national identity. Local authorities in the destination regions generally took a positive attitude toward the ethnographers. The zeitgeist favoured science and expeditions. The Veps people – especially those in more remote and isolated villages – frequently greeted the Estonian ethnographers with initial scepticism. The Estonians had to explain their objectives and use documents to prove their bona fides. Later the alienation dissipated and once the close kinship of the Vepsian and Estonian languages was revealed, the newcomers received a rapturous reception as if they were long-lost relatives. At Sodjärv Lake, which served on multiple occasions as the ethnographers’ base camp, Estonian researchers became accepted by the Vepsians as their own people. It is difficult to gauge precisely the influence that those and later expeditions had on the Vepsian peoples. The Estonians’ visits probably helped to bolster the generally weak self-identity of the Veps people. While the Russians in the region all too often took a supercilious view of the Veps and their language, the ethnographers from Estonia had come to study them precisely because of their identity and held in high regard everything from old peasant culture to the language. Some local people still speak positively about Estonians. The five expeditions to the villages of the southern Vepsian region discussed in this article, their outcome and resonance make up a key part of a cultural current that sprang from Finno-Ugric studies in Soviet Estonia, the best-known examples of which are Lennart Meri’s ethnographic documentary films, the choral music of Veljo Tormis and the graphic art of Kaljo Põllu. Emphasising their Finno-Ugric roots was for Estonians an additional way to express their Estonian identity independent of Soviet rule and ethnographers made a significant contribution to this trend.
爱沙尼亚民族学家在南维波斯村庄,1965 - 1969爱沙尼亚民族学家自民族志诞生之初就对芬兰-乌戈尔民族产生了兴趣,并在可能的范围内前往相关地区研究他们的文化。从20世纪60年代开始,位于塔尔图的爱沙尼亚苏维埃社会主义共和国国家民族志博物馆(过去和现在的爱沙尼亚国家博物馆)在其主任阿列克谢·彼得森(Aleksei Peterson)的领导下成为芬兰-乌戈尔民族志的中心。在语言学家(主要是保罗·阿里斯特)的支持下,对东方语言学亲戚的考察开始了,并在后来的几年里独立进行。这篇文章考察了爱沙尼亚民族学家在1965年至1969年间对南维斯村庄进行的五次探险。主要的资料来源是探险时的野外工作日记。此外,本文还考察了这些探险的照片、电影片段和图纸,以及收集到的物品和民族志描述。本文分析了以考察所得材料为基础的学术和面向大众科学的文本以及当时爱沙尼亚媒体对考察的报道。我们采访了一些参加旅行的人。在20世纪60年代,南副总统地区与世界其他地区的联系很差,那里的人们过着与世隔绝的生活。由于这个原因,该地区的村庄有大量现存的或最近才消失的方面(如刀耕火种的农业,独木舟的建造或使用树枝来加热炉子),这吸引了民族学家。对于爱沙尼亚研究人员来说,南Veps地区是一个独特的窗口,他们在那个时期研究民族起源问题。物质文化很少得到研究,彼得森认为这是他的使命和机会。现代化已经在进行中,一切旧的东西都有褪色的危险。对这些问题感兴趣的人种学家不得不赶紧为科学保存可以抢救的东西。使用静态相机和胶片相机记录了维波斯人的传统农民文化,进行了民族志采访,制作了民族志图纸,并以极大的热情收集了文物。数量很重要,野外工作通常是一项集体追求——许多人毕竟可以完成不止一个人。在实地考察过程中记录的材料很快就进入了学术流通——在国际会议上发表了报告,在期刊上发表了文章。爱沙尼亚媒体对这次探险的报道也相当生动。报纸发表了各种篇幅的报道,至少有一次,电视上讨论了民族志学家在维波斯地区的活动。爱沙尼亚学者认为并传达了南部Veps村庄是波罗的海-芬兰童话般的土地。总的来说,研究人员很享受这次探险的机会。人们认为这是一件高尚的事情,在某种意义上也与爱沙尼亚民族事业联系在一起。由于这个原因,爱沙尼亚社会积极接受对语言亲属的研究- -即它与民族特性有关。目的地区的地方当局对民族志学者普遍持积极态度。时代精神支持科学和探险。Veps人——尤其是那些住在更偏远和偏僻村庄的人——经常以最初的怀疑态度迎接爱沙尼亚民族志学家。爱沙尼亚人必须解释他们的目的,并用文件证明他们的诚意。后来,这种疏离感消失了,一旦发现了维波斯语和爱沙尼亚语之间的亲密关系,新来的人就受到了热烈的欢迎,就好像他们是失散多年的亲戚一样。在曾多次作为人种学家大本营的Sodjärv湖,爱沙尼亚的研究人员被vepese人接受为他们自己的民族。很难准确地衡量这些以及后来的远征对波斯人民的影响。爱沙尼亚人的访问可能有助于增强副总统班子普遍薄弱的自我认同。虽然该地区的俄罗斯人经常对副总统和他们的语言持傲慢态度,但来自爱沙尼亚的民族志学家正是因为他们的身份而来研究他们,并高度重视从古老的农民文化到语言的一切。一些当地人仍然对爱沙尼亚人持积极态度。本文中讨论的五次对南维波斯地区村庄的考察,其结果和共鸣构成了苏维埃爱沙尼亚芬兰-乌戈尔研究的文化潮流的重要组成部分,其中最著名的例子是Lennart Meri的民族志纪录片,Veljo Tormis的合唱音乐和Kaljo Põllu的图形艺术。 强调他们的芬兰-乌戈尔根是爱沙尼亚人表达他们独立于苏联统治的爱沙尼亚身份的另一种方式,民族志学家对这一趋势作出了重大贡献。 强调他们的芬兰-乌戈尔根是爱沙尼亚人表达他们独立于苏联统治的爱沙尼亚身份的另一种方式,民族志学家对这一趋势作出了重大贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信