Popular history in the
view of Estonian folkloristics
From the question 'true
or false' to the question 'what kind of truth'
Tiiu Jaago
This article has stemmed from
the research of family tradition, to be more exact, of a branch
of it - oral family history - in Estonia.
On the one hand, family tradition
does not seem to belong to folkloristics: this material is often
too concrete compared to other accepted areas of folklore, it
is directly connected with actual facts and concerns a very small
group only, being limited to the members of the family, nuclear
or extended. (1) On the other
hand, the narrated family stories do not belong entirely to genealogy
either - for that purpose the narratives (although based on facts)
are too much removed from historical facts. Thus, in the three
quarters of the 20th century, oral family history as a field
of research remains in an interdisciplinary area. At the same
time it is clear that family tradition runs as a separate phenomenon
in parallel with amateur genealogy - one cannot replace the other.
The reason lies in the fact that oral family history has its
own specific role in the (popular) treatment of history. And
proceeding from that, the valuation of family history as a discipline
of folkloristics is justified.
Popular history (2)
in Estonia forms into a field of study through the collation
of historical facts and heritage data. First the truth-value
of a certain source is questioned (this is the true or false
question). In this case the folklore data tend to be considered
fiction, rumour or downright lie - i.e. data that are not grounded.
After that the empirical truth is reached that different sources
have their own exceptional characteristics and in each of them
there is truth (question: what kind of truth). Such approach
is gaining more serious attention in the era when science is
characterised by its trend towards interdisciplinarity. The following
article aims to provide an overview of the results obtained in
comparing different sources.
Boundaries between fields
of science
Quite recently, narratives
concerning family history remained in the intermediate area between
disciplines. In the period when the walls between fields of science
were relatively inflexible because of specialisation, these narratives
were too poetic for historians and the data in the narratives
could not be used because they were not as reliable as church
registers, inspection reports and other traditional historical
sources. For folklorists these stories were too information-centred,
factual. These narratives lacked the characteristic features
of folklore. The dominating opinion in family history research
was that the only true evidence of an event was a written historical
document. When oral data did not coincide with what was found
in written sources (which is by far not a rare case), they were
left aside. Narratives were interpreted as fantasy, which gave
rise to questions that could not be answered. (3) Folklorists
more readily accepted news-like realistic stories called urban
legends, sensational events, etc. (4) These
differ from the narratives studied here in that they concentrate
on extraordinary events, not on concrete people and daily or
historical events.
The question whether the heard
story is based on truth or not is predictable and natural. For
an academic dispute, however, a suitable method had to be found
for interpreting the realistic narratives enriched with opinions-judgements.
How, then, can narratives speaking of historical facts and daily
reality be turned into an object of research? The analysis has
to take the genre-specific features into consideration. The central
feature of the genre classification of the narratives is the
relationship between the narrative and the reality it is based
on. To analyse information-centred narratives specific methods
of transfering reality have to be found. These have been discovered
by means of comparing historical sources and tradition data,
and will be dealt with more closely below.
In order to understand texts/different
sources it is not sufficient to collate the facts in them. From
the point of analysing tradition a third aspect has to be taken
into account: how the narrative truth is influenced by the time
and environment of narrating (see an example of this in Jaago
1995). Anniki Kaivola-Bregenh¸j (in Estonian 2001: 45),
concentrating on the study of narrator's memory and narrational
technique, explains the folkloristic aspect of her work as follows:
The question is not whether
the narrator remembers 'correctly' or not, but rather what he
wants to remember and how. [---]
A folklore researcher does not look for the one and only truth
in personality stories, but tries to find out what is the importance
of memory for the narrator and what the narrator wants to say
with his story.
So in tradition it is not only
the actual fact that is important, but also the narrator and
his/her audience, and in particular, what meaning they give to
the real events. For the researcher of tradition the question
of truth or falsehood cannot remain barely on the level of a
fact presented from real life: how the past times and facts are
remembered and interpreted is also a reflection of truth, although
on a different level.
The 'partition walls' between
the above-mentioned disciplines in Estonian science became significantly
more flexible in the 1990s and this enabled to elicit the discussed
area more powerfully than before. Speaking of the changes that
folkloristics underwent in the 1990s, we must take a look at
the end of the 1920s and 1930s. In that period several ideas
and objectives, which became fruitful later, were identified
and studies were published, all in agreement with the searches
of the 1990s. The declarations of that time sound quite similar
to the moods of the beginning of the 1990s. The following example
dates back to 1938.
We have to admit that one
side in our modern historical research has developed quite poorly
- this is the close contact with these fields of science that
correspond to history. Each of these fields has achieved great
results in the last decade, but the results have found relatively
limited use. Fields of science are specialising, which is normal,
but they must be united by a general goal. There are many problems
where the method of historical research has to be associated
with the research methods dominating in other areas, where abundant
material must be taken from other areas in order to see and solve
the object of study better. The same situation - the results
of historical research being relatively rarely used - is also
predominant in other fields of science. (Liiv 1938: 2-3)
To prove his statement, the
historian Otto Liiv provides an example of the necessity to combine
the reseach of history and folkloristics. (5)
From the aspect of folkloristics
and this topic the article by Oskar Loorits Vägilase
prototüüpe (Prototypes of heroes) (1927) may be
regarded as significant. Firstly, because this article has had
a considerable influence on merging real-life biographical and
everyday narratives into classical types of folklore in Estonian
fokloristics (Laugaste 1957; Hiiemäe 1978). Secondly, because
in this article Oskar Loorits outlines the way a real character
becomes a folk tale hero. Although the concentrated portrait
of a folk tale hero that he has sketched belongs to peasant ideals
(physically extraordinarily strong and big, mentally average
or even foolish, does his feats mainly in the tavern or elsewhere
outside home: on his way from the tavern, in caravan, at a
fair, working together; the starting point of these stories
is connected with challenge and bet, they do not
spring from quick-temperedness: the main character is a wanderer,
thresher-man, simple peasant) (Loorits 1927: 69-70), but
it stems from the informant group. (6) In
this case what is important is that Loorits shows how the creation
of popular tales that are based on real life is influenced by
the narrator's memory, impressions and imagination to supernatural
fantasy figures, who do not seem to have any logical or realistic
base (idem: 71).
Regardless of articles or even
lengthier treatment, the study of family tradition did not emerge
in folkloristics in this period. For that purpose it was necessary
to get used to new themes and points of view. It was more necessary
than before to delve into the interrelation of the narrative,
storytelling and the underlying reality, to formulate the rules
that are applied for transferring the life events into narratives.
(7)
The studies treating the truth-value
of family tradition remained marginal, yet not nonexistent in
the Soviet period. This was owing to Eva Krüdener's case,
studied by Aleksander Loorits (1987) (this story is also familiar
from Jaan Kross's novel Keisri hull published in 1978).
Tradition speaks of a rare case, in which a Baltic-German manor
lord marries a poor Estonian girl Eeva. This example story was
recorded in 1925 from a 75-year-old local villager:
At the time of the grandfather
of today's Puiatu baron the Puiatu windmill was built. All the
unmarried mothers from Vastemõisa parish were brought
as a penalty to this building site to hand material. Among these
women there had been Eeva, the daughter of a blind cripple. She
had been a beautiful being and the baron had liked her very much
and at last she had become the lady of the manor. [---] Eeva's son was the father
of our baron, then. (Loorits 1987: 145)
The problem is turned more
exciting but also more complicated by the baron and Eeva's nine
children, who were born before the official marriage of their
parents. Loorits (1987: 152-153) notes that Eeva went a long
way to become the lady of the manor, the case became the classic
example of forging and breaking the law at that time.
Aleksander Loorits has based
his treatment on the collation of data of different origin: tradition
data (in addition to memoirs heard in his childhood also the
data from the collection Historical tradition compiled
in 1920s-1930s) and data from church registers stored in Historical
Arcives. From the excursus comparing different data Loorits draws
the conclusion: There can be only one conclusion to this story:
folk tradition must not be underestimated, they contain much
truth, you only have to find it, not give up "Pah, folk
tale!" (Loorits 1987: 155).
From the periphery of science
to the centre of attention
In the 1990s comparative studies
of historical and tradition data were published, in which the
regularities of narrating of historical events were formulated.
All the following, quite different examples converge to the understanding
that the whole truth is not contained in a certain source, the
sources together participate in creating a more complete picture.
The historian Priit Pirsko
(1995) analyses buying and selling farms for perpetuity in Estonia
in the 19th century. He does not proceed from traditional historical
research methods (which would be based on sales documents). Pirsko
is more interested in the mental attitudes of the social groups
involved in the process. The opinions of three social groups
are observed:
- local press in the German
language (landholders, sellers),
- newspapers in Estonian (which
were targeted at peasants, potential buyers),
- tradition (the peasant's point
of view as a buyer).
The press both in German and
Estonian reflects this process from the aspect of the respective
social group. Pirsko calls these aspects "The German mirror"
and "The Estonian mirror", respectively. The narratives
were, however, collected three fourths of a century later than
the selling process and are therefore the reflection of a reflection
of the onetime events and attitudes, or as Pirsko puts it, "a
trick mirror".
Pirsko's study reveals that
the tradition dealing with the past is important for evaluating
the past, but these evaluations are not a driving force in the
new situation: a person behaves for practical considerations
according to the current situation and not because of the direct
effect of the stories.
We have to agree with Pirsko:
while in the "trick mirror" - in the1930s - the positive
attitude to buying and owning a farm became natural and due to
that the opinions of older people were similar in the Soviet
time, it was not the case during the time when the process was
implemented. From Jõhvi, one of the parishes in northeastern
Estonia, comes one of the brightest examples of the peasants'
hesitations in deciding whether to buy a farm. Namely, the sales
of farms coincided with mass emigration to Russia (the hordes
of emigrants moved through Jõhvi). People did not trust
the local manor lords and left the farms they had rented without
buying them for perpetuity and migrated to Russia in hope that
the government would help them when they arrived in St Petersburg.
In the 1930s, of course, also the post-emigration painful experiences
and disappointment in the choice were described (EKLA 17: 1,
pp. 128-137).
Stories of the past are not
direct. The main goal of these stories cannot be reporting of
the events or an instruction for being oriented in a new or unknown
situation. But through the stories the past can be interpreted
and the experience evaluated in this way. This is what forces
old stories to be told anew and from a topical standpoint, but
this also adds layers of different times into the narrative.
The settlement historian Ülle
Tarkiainen compares the village foundation narratives stored
in Estonian Folklore Archives with historical documents recorded
in Historical Archives. She concludes from this comparative study
that due to certain reasons (for example if situations are similar),
the narratives of different periods merge into one. For instance,
she analyses a story in which the deserting of a village is associated
with the plague during the Great Northern War (in 1710). Historical
sources would rather refer these data to the time of the Polish-Swedish
war at the beginning of the 17th century (Tarkiainen 2000: 121).
The historian Enn Tarvel reached
an analogical result a few years earlier in a publication in
which he gave an overview of the history of Viinistu, a village
on the northern coast of Estonia and in which he also dealt with
the traditional history of the settlement (Tarvel 1983: 65-66).
The tradition in Viinistu
says that the village was founded by two Finnish men Heiki and
Aadu, who came from Suursaare and who had worn white shirts and
long trousers. Heiki had built his house to the north, Aadu to
the south. Between the houses there had been such a thick brush
of willows that no one could pass through. [---] From these men the ends of the village
had got their names.
The northern end is called Heikiots [Heiki's end] [---],
the southern Aaduots [Aadu's end] (sometimes also after
Aadu's wife Sohvi - Sohvi's end).
Enn Tarvel looks for people
called Heiki and Aadu, and the wife of the latter, Sohvi, from
written historical sources. What comes out is that they do not
live in Viinistu village at the same time. Heiki and Sohvi are
in the list of inhabitants in the 17th century, whereas Sohvi
seems to be a masculine name at the time; Aadu is first recorded
in the register of villagers after the Great Northern War in
the second quarter of the 18th century. At that time there are
five Heikis in the village, and none of them can be a founder
of the village. So it can be supposed that in tradition different
times and different people of the same name have merged.
Aadu Must (2000), having compared
historical documents and tradition, have drawn three conclusions,
of which more important here are those that concern the characters
of a narrative and events associated with them. Conclusion
1: as a rule, the secondary characters in extraordinary events
are replaced by principal characters. Conclusion 2: the brightest
details of events that are disappearing from memory merge with
later events. (8) The latter coincides
with the above conclusions of both Ülle Tarkiainen and Enn
Tarvel. The topic of the relationship between a historical character
and a narrative hero was discussed in connection with Oskar Loorits
and his prototypes of strongman. In the materials from the second
half of the 20th century it emerges in the study by Aigi Rahi
(2001), which also shows that colourful heroes are created in
the course of storytelling. Aigi Rahi compares the facts of the
historical documents concerning the mass repressions of 1941
and 1949 and the knowledge based on memory. She concludes that
the memory-based knowledge is characterised by the intensification
of some aspects and fading of others - both are reactions to
fear and/or extreme situation. In this framework such people
are spoken of as heroes, who for example, at the time were regarded
simply as participants in the event.
Oral family narratives
Oral family narratives belonged to the knowledge that circulated
within the family and were appreciated within nearly all of the
20th century by genealogists as 'homework': from the spoken and
heard stories a base of knowledge was created. On this basis
they could start looking for written sources either from literature,
church archives or the Historical Archives. In 1996 the book
by historian Kalev Jaago and the author "See olevat olnud
"
Rahvaluulekeskne uurimus esivanemate lugudest ("It is
said to have been
" A folklore-centred study of ancestors'
stories) was published, in which the oral and written data of
the family history of eight families are compared.
Principally the same as above
applied for data found in oral tradition and historical sources.
I have referred to the intertwining of events that have happened
in different times as "the confluence of times" (Jaago
1995; Jaago & Jaago 1996: 69-71, 128-129). The 'beginning'
of the oral family narratives in modern Estonian tradition dates
back to the beginning of the 18th century. The ancestors' coming
'here' (in the 18th century) and the use of family names, which
started in 1820s-1830s, are markedly interrelated in tradition.
Between these events there were three-four generations, which
guaranteed the continuity of memory by means of existing contacts.
According to tradition, in some places the choice of a family
name was related to the earlier home place of the ancestors,
for example a family living in Vigala in western Estonia was
called Halliste after a place in southern Estonia, because an
ancestor had been brought from there to Vigala by the will of
the manor lords. (9) (The relationship
between the first inhabitants and the names in tradition was
also exposed in the above example of the settlement history of
Viinistu village.) Generally these events (the origin of the
ancestor of the 18th century and the choice of the family name
at the beginning of the 19th century) were also interrelated
in historical reality.
In the rural community the
line of ancestors connected with the common home farm is known,
and even there, largely the male line is known. Of the eight
studied family narratives four came from western Estonia (Läänemaa)
and four from the coastal area of northern Estonia (Virumaa).
The narratives of the Läänemaa families had a much
shorter sense of time and they were more weakly structured than
those from northern Estonia, despite the fact that also their
ancestors had been local. Closer analysis and placing the problem
in a wider context (the social and regional differences - who
has family trees at all) showed that those who came from a farm
family had better knowledge of family history. It can be stated
that first these were schemes based on social status, upon which
the later relation-based schemes were founded. (10) In
such differences of family tree diagrams the core of the family
identity and its changes are hidden (either from social to national
or an individual-centred scheme that emphasises kinship).
In the peasant family tree diagram the line of 18-century ancestors
is 'shorter' than in the genealogical scheme - some people 'drop
out' of the line, which reveals that the capacity of memory is
limited and the memory-based narrative has made choices by what
one should inevitably know and what not (Jaago 1995). But the
narrator does not sense it: again the rule of confluence of times
applies.
It is characteristic of the
narratives that earlier events are described according to the
perceptions of the narrator's time. For example, the time preceding
family names is not reflected in the narratives - the ancestors
from the 18th century are still called by family names, although
they had not got these names yet. Also the narrators are surprised
at three crosses instead of a signature on a 19th-century farm
purchase document: was it really illiteracy or a prejudiced
attitude to the written word even in the second half of the 19th
century.
The problem of the effect of
the time of narrating on the tradition is associated with the
meaning: what kind of meaning is ascribed to storytelling as
an activity, to the narrative and the events and people of which
and whom the person narrates. The earlier Estonian folkloristics
has not recorded much data about this.
The collections of Estonian
life stories and tradition from the 1990s (11) leave
the conclusions for the researcher to make. The directed questions
are oriented on the subject, not the narrator's or the group's
decisions on the meanings of these matters. The instructions
use the following words: 'describe', 'recall', etc.
A life story is a narrative
that a person speaks about his/her life, about what has actually
happened. A life story is an attempt to present one's life in
a realistic way. A good life story is one, which presents real
life directly without literary, psychological, sociological etc.
reflections, it speaks of what has happened and it is spoken
by an experienced storyteller. (Folder:
Elulood Eesti Kultuuriloolises Arhiivis - Life Stories
in Estonian Cultural-Historical Archives.)
Nevertheless, the authors build
up their story on estimative comparisons - this is just one of
the most universal patterns of narrating of real life events.
Yet the questions - what the narrator him/herself thinks of the
meaning of his/her story, why and for whom it is interesting
- are avoided. Only allusions to interest in estimates can be
noticed in the Kodu ja pere (Home and Family) questionnaire
(Sheet No. 185 of Estonian National Museum):
How long did it take you
to settle in your new home before it became really 'your own'?
Were there differences between the family members? [---] If you had more than one
childhood home, which of these was the 'one' for you. Why?
We see that only in single
cases assessment is asked for, but the aspect of meaning is not
pointed out, it will be for the researcher to find.
In the instructing questionnaire
of the competition of collecting family tradition, organised
by the Finnish Literature Society in 1997, the questions about
the meaning are much more direct (topic: family history and its
meaning, incl questions: what meaning do these stories have
for you, what do you want to hand on to the following generations,
why do you consider it important; topic: the stories of different
generations, incl questions what kind of feelings have these
stories aroused in you; topic: family and places of living,
incl questions of the feelings that the narrator has when visiting
places connected with ancestors or earlier homes, etc., etc.
(Folder: Suvun suuri kertomus. Kerukilpailu sukuun ja perheeseen
liittyvästä muistitiedoista itsenäisessä
Suomessa. 1.3.-31.8.1997 - The Great Narrative of the Family.
Competition of collecting family tradition in Finland 1.3.-31.8.1997).
We might be scared that such
directives would make the narrator too self-centred. In some
respects it is so but through this we will learn why these stories
are important (incidentally, people answer quite rationally and
clearly). For the researcher, however, a new perspective is opened,
one, which the subject-based collection is devoid of: what the
narrators themselves think.
In summary
One of the important obstacles
that had to be overcome to study family history from the folkloristic
aspect is connected with the topic of truth and falsehood and
the problem of the specificity of research sources. By comparing
the oral and written data it is proved that by combining the
classical sources of different fields of science new perspectives
and interpretations of the past can be found. The acceptance
of methods of transferring the underlying reality into information-centred
narrative tradition has gradually improved.
Position in the area between
disciplines was the reason why the earlier (in the 1980s - beginning
of 1990s) academic speeches on this subject were marginal and
circumspect: it had to be proved that this was folklore and that
these texts were valuable as sources of research.
The other aspect that is considered
of importance in this perspective is that the presence of the
narrator, the group of similar tradition and the storytelling
situation and their effect on the recorded text has to be taken
into consideration much more purposefully. In this way the processional
qualities of tradition become more noticeable.
Translated by Ann Kuslap
References:
Estonian Cultural Historical
Archives in the Estonian Literary Museum (Tartu):
- Eesti elulood (Estonian Life Stories). Manuscript
collection
- Ajaloolist traditsiooni [x] kihelkonnast (Historical
tradition from [x] parish). Manuscript collection.
Estonian National Museum (Tartu):
- KV - Materials sent by correspondents.
Manuscript collection.
Folklore Archives of the Finnish
Literature Society (Helsinki):
- Suvun suuri kertomus (The Great Narrative of the Family).
Manuscript collection.
Alver, Martin 1986. Alverite
suguvõsa kroonika II.
Alwer, Juhan 1939. Alwer´ite
suguvõsa kroonika [I].
Hiiemäe, Mall 1978. Kodavere
pajatused. Kujunemine ja koht rahvajututraditsioonis. Eesti
NSV TA Fr. R. Kreutzwaldi nim. Kirjandusmuuseum. Tallinn: Eesti
Raamat.
Holbek, Bengt 1990. The Family
anecdote: event and narrative. - Rörich, Lutz & Wienker-Piepho
(eds.). Storytelling in Contemporary Societies. Tübingen:
Gunter Narr Verlag, pp. 103-112.
Jaago, Tiiu 1995. Peculiarities
of oral Tradition in intellectual Culture. - Pärdi, Heiki
(ed.). Pro Ethnologia No. 3, Eesti Rahva Muuseumi üllitised.
Tartu: Eesti Rahva Muuseum, pp. 116-121. http://www.erm.ee/pro/pro3.
Jaago, Tiiu & Jaago, Kalev
1996. "See olevat olnud
" Rahvaluulekeskne
uurimus esivanemate lugudest. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli
Kirjastus.
Kaivola-Bregenhøj, Anniki
2001. Miks me mäletame nii nagu me mäletame? - Kõiva,
Mare & Kuperjanov, Andres (toim.). Mäetagused
nr. 15. Tartu: EKM folkloristika osakond, lk. 35-46. http://haldjas.folklore.ee/tagused/nr15.
Kõiva, Mare (ed.) 1996.
Contemporary Folklore: Changing World View and Tradition. Tartu:
Institute of Estonian Language & Estonian Museum of Literature.
Laugaste, Eduard 1957. Kalevipoja-muistendite
tüpologiseerimise küsimusi. Tartu Riikliku Ülikooli
toimetised nr. 53. Tartu: TRÜ Kirjastus.
Liiv, Otto 1938. Eesti ajaloouurimise
mõningaist ülesandeist. - Ajalooline Ajakiri,
nr. 1, lk. 1-4.
Lipp, Martin 1909. Eesti suguvõsade
uurimine. - Eesti Kirjandus, nr. 1-2, lk. 3-15, 66-73.
Loorits, Aleksander 1987. Rahvapärimus
ja tõelus. - Ingrid Sarv (koost.) Rahvaluulest.
Eesti NSV Teaduste Akadeemia Emakeele Seltsi Toimetised 21. Tallinn:
Eesti NSV Teaduste Akadeemia, lk. 142-158.
Loorits, Oskar 1927. Vägilase
prototüüpe. - Album M. J. Eiseni 70. sünnipäevaks.
Tartu: Eesti Kirjanduse Seltsi ja Eesti Rahva Muuseumi Kirjastus,
lk. 37-71.
Must, Aadu 2000. Arhiividokument
ja pärimus: konflikt, harmoonia või sünergia?
- Konverents "Kultuur ja mälu" Tartu 6.-7.10.2000.
Ettekannete annotatsioonid. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli etnoloogia
õppetool, lk. 16-17.
Pirsko, Priit 1995. Talud päriseks:
protsessi algus müüjate ja ostjate pilgu läbi.
- Jansen, Ea & Arukaevu, Jaanus (toim.). Seltsid ja ühiskonna
muutumine. Talupojaühiskonnast rahvusriigini. Tartu-Tallinn:
Eesti Ajalooarhiiv, TA Ajaloo Instituut, lk. 97-117.
Rahi, Aigi 2001. Sündmus
eri allikate valguses (küüditatute näite varal).
- Anepaio, Terje & Kõresaar, Ene (toim.). Kultuur
ja mälu. Konverentsi materjale. Studia Ethnologica Tartuensia
nr. 4. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli etnoloogia õppetool,
lk. 216-226.
Rootsmäe, Leeming 1977.
Jakob Hurda esivanematest. - Keel ja Kirjandus, nr. 4,
lk. 230-233.
Tarkiainen, Ülle 2000.
Külad ja hajatalud eesti rahvatraditsioonis. - Küng,
Ene jt. (toim.). Kultuuriloolised ekskursid. Eesti Ajalooarhiivi
Toimetised. Acta et commentationes Archivi Historici Estoniae.
6 (13). Tartu: Eesti Ajalooarhiiv, lk. 119-134.
Tarvel, Enn 1983. Lahemaa
ajalugu. Tallinn: Eesti Raamat.
Voolaid, Kalle 1996. Nägemusi
Lurichist. Final thesis. Manuscript in the department of
folklore in the University of Tartu.
Voolaid, Kalle 2001. Jõumehe
fenomen. Georg Lurich ajaloolisest tegelasest rahvajutu kangelaseks.
- Tiiu Jaago (koost.). Pärimuslik ajalugu. Tartu:
Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus, lk. 183-194.
References from text:
(1)
Cf. e.g.. Holbek 1990. Back
(2)
Estonian folkloristics has dealt with historical tradition, but
this method of research focuses rather on the themes and motifs
of the text, not on the treatment of history in the group who
share similar tradition. Back
(3)
See e.g. the judgements of the classic of Estonian genealogy
M. Lipp or his followers (Lipp 1909; Rootsmäe 1977). Back
(4)
See e.g. Kõiva 1996. Back
(5)
The efficiency of the parallel research of history and folklore
in the 1930s is characterised by few articles by Hendrik Sepp
and Oskar Loorits, for instance. In the collections of that time
in Estonian Folklore Archives quite diverse material can be found
in manuscripts about village life and about narrating of it.
A more compact collection Historical tradition is in the
Cultural Historical Archives of Estonian Literary Museum. These
manuscripts became an important base of study in the 1990s. Among
the collections, which had rarely been known of and used so far,
several others have become of interest to ethnology , for example
at the end of the 1990s Heiki Pärdi made a speech in the
Learned Estonia Society on the topic of cleanliness-dirtiness
based on a survey conducted in Estonian villages in the thirties.
Back
(6)
It becomes evident in family tradition that in the descriptions
of farmers-ancestors of earlier generations height and strength
are highly appreciated qualities. These are often the only stories
that can be told in connection with ancestors. I have called
such stories about one's ancestors 'visiting card stories'. The
primary qualities of ancestors started to change at the beginning
of the 20th century, in connection with urbanisation and the
spread of education (Jaago & Jaago 1996: 84-86, 97).
Kalle Voolaid (1996; 2001,
also see in this collection), having studied Georg Lurich, the
top 19th century, beginning of the 20th century athlete as a
folk tale hero, also admits that in that period a strongman had
an advantage in becoming a hero over characters with other qualities.
Back
(7)
The main problem why scientists did not reach the treatment synthesising
tradition data and historical sources in the 1920s-1930s seems
to be the fact that the specificity of sources of different types
was not taken into consideration. For example, in the chapter
on the end of the Ancient Period in the History of Estonian Nation
published in 1932, both the chronicles of the 12th century and
the oral tradition collected in the 19th century are combined
in one. It is possible that the disappointment in the efficiency
of such treatment drove studies to the other extremity: each
field of science may use only certain sources. Back
(8)
The third conclusion concerns the acknowledgement of the diversity
of different sources and methods in modern Estonian historical
research. Back
(9)
KV 745, p. 479; Jaago & Jaago 1996: 78-84. Back
(10)
Cf. e.g. the Alver family chronicle, part I and II, in which
the first deals with the farm family diagram and the second,
made in the 1980s, the diagram that follows family relationships
(Alwer 1939; Alver 1986). Back
(11)
I refer to the two large collections Eesti elulood (Estonian
Life Stories) and Kodu ja pere (Home and Family). Back
Contents