METHODOLOGY OF LATVIAN ORNAMENT STUDY (1920–1943) AS NARRATIVE OF NATIONALISM

Abstract

In the 21^st century, Latvian ornament has gained widespread recognition as a visual embodiment of Latvian artistic and cultural expressions, constituting a fundamental component of the national identity. Primarily assembled as an imitation or reproduction of 19^th century textile ornament, this visual tradition originates from the narrative cultivated during the interwar period in Latvia.

The ornamentation of 19^th century textiles was extensively researched as early as the first quarter of the 20^th century. It acquired the name “latvju raksti” and status of considerable significance within the framework of national identity, transcending mere decorative value to encapsulate profound symbolic meaning. Notable figures contributing to the interpretation and analysis of Latvian ornamentation include Jānis Sudmalis, Ernests Brastiņš, Matīss Siliņš, and Jēkabs Bīne.

An analysis of the methodology they used for researching Latvian ornaments reveals the following techniques: isolating specific ornament elements from their visual context, using selective names for ornament elements linking these elements to traditional folksongs, liberally interpreting folksongs to extrapolate meanings for ornament elements, and employing of “comparative ornaments”. This latter method involves the identification of similarities between Latvian ornamentation and the ornamentation of cultures geographically and temporally distant. In some cases, elements of ornament were labeled as “Latvian” or “Liv” without proper empirical investigation, leading to the emergence of ethnic connotations.

It is essential to note that these techniques do not comply with strict scientific criteria, but their use can be explained by the scarcity of historians who studied ethnography in 1920–1930 Latvia. Indeed, the majority of researchers delving into Latvian ornamentation were predominantly practitioners of the arts.

However, a nuanced examination of this methodology through the prism of nationalism affords novel perspectives for evaluation. “Latvju raksti” can be analyzed as an exemplar of the “invented tradition” paradigm articulated by Eric Hobsbawm, because an artificial historical nexus was established. This cultural phenomenon can be placed alongside other traditions like folksongs, folksong festivals, and traditional folk dress, all pivotal in the creation and consolidation of the Latvian nation. Consequently, the methodology employed in the study of Latvian ornamentation serves not so much as an objective reflection of the past but assumes the character of a potent instrument for the visual representation of the young state through a nationalist narrative.