| Sažetak (engleski) | The dissertation explores the development of the Ethnographic Museum in Zagreb from its founding in 1919 to 2015. It starts from the assumption that there have been nine different museum policy concepts in the Museum from its establishment in 1919 to the present day, which coincide with changes in the socio-political environment and are mostly defined by the mandate periods of different directors. The core of the work is a discussion about how directors and employees of the Ethnographic Museum understood their work within it, how they defined its policies, and how they sought to implement them through various museum practices. This issue is best exemplified by the case of the Textile and Clothes Collection (hereinafter referred to as the Collection) through the ways of its shaping, naming, classifying, and then interpreting and representing it to the public. The institutional history of the Textile and Clothes Collection dates to the 19th century when, as part of the national integration processes, national institutions were established in Croatia, including the National Museum in Zagreb in 1846. This museum initiated the collection of objects related to both material and non-material aspects of folk culture, not only from the Croatian region but also from the broader South Slavic area, with the goal of shaping an image of national culture. Among the material objects, clothing, utility textiles, and fragments of weaving embroidery and lace held a prominent place. During the reorganization of the National Museum in 1880, a collection of textile samples was established which was intended to serve as an educational aid for students at the Crafts School. For this occasion, ethnographic material was separated and added to this collection, marking the discontinuation of ethnographic collecting within the National Museum. From 1880 onwards, objects of rural textile folk art were collected at the Museum of Arts and Crafts to serve as inspiration for artists and artisans, as well as educational materials for students at the Crafts School. With the establishment of the Croatian School Museum and the Trade and Crafts Museum, such materials were also collected in those institutions in accordance with their respective missions. During this period, costumes and clothing played an important role in national, economic, educational, social, artistic, and cultural events. Despite the continuous efforts and initiatives of individuals such as F. Rački, I. Kršnjavi, B. Bogišić, J. Purić, S. Berger, V. Deželić, and A. Jiroušek, the Ethnographic Museum in Zagreb, or the Ethnographic Department of the National Museum, was only founded in 1919, after the conclusion of World War I, within the framework of the newly created Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes. The initial collection of Museum objects consisted of approximately 20,000 items, mainly textile fragments and samples, utilitarian folk textiles, jewellery, individual parts of costumes, and sets that were separated from other collections of the National Museum, collections of the aforementioned museums, and private collections during its establishment. The largest collection was the National Collection of Salamon Berger, an industrialist and collector, which also served as the immediate impetus for the Museum's founding. The collection contained over 8,000 objects, predominantly textiles from various regions of Croatia, Southeastern and Central Europe, as well as Middle Eastern and Far Eastern countries. The initial collection of the Museum reflected the collecting concepts of different institutions and individuals at that time, motivated by various factors. These factors include the desire to create a representation of their own nation, efforts to preserve peasant culture, which was seen as the one carrying the “national character”, from detrimental effects of modernization, the desire to restore artistic craftsmanship and promote the Croatian national industry, and the need to demonstrate the continuity of life in the region where they wanted to establish a national state and define a national identity. After the establishment of the Ethnographic Museum, clothing and textiles that became part of the Collection were reclassified as objects of “peasant art” and categorized in accordance with the museum's policies. The first phase of the Museum's development was marked by the efforts of Salomon Berger and Vladimir Tkalčić. According to Vladimir Tkalčić's clearly defined museum mission, the primary focus of the Museum was the study of the peasant social strata, primarily from the region of Croatia, followed by Yugoslavia and other Slavic and non-Slavic countries, as well as the cultures of “primitive” peoples. The Textile and Clothes Collection, in addition to its scientific purpose, also served as a source for artistic and creative craftsmanship. From the very beginning, the Museum's social role was reflected in its pedagogical and educational work. From the very beginning, the Museum initiated professional and scientific work. According to Vladimir Tkalčić's understanding, the museum collections were meant to provide a “clear representation of the entire folk life of our people”. The Textile and Clothes Collection was supposed to be enriched with various types of costumes from the Yugoslav regions, as well as various forms of weaving, embroidery, and lace. To achieve this, he organized a network of museum commissioners and friends of the Museum and initiated a series of collecting campaigns. In addition to collecting objects, data related to them were also gathered. Clothes and textiles were documented through drawings and photographs, and various practices in which costumes played an important role were captured on film. During the interwar period, Yugoslavia participated in numerous international exhibitions where it aimed to unite tradition and modernism. These exhibitions presented costumes and folk utility textiles to show Yugoslavia as a modern country that participated in world culture as an equal. Household industry products were displayed alongside museum objects. As a result, at these exhibitions, peasant culture was not presented as a relic of the past but rather as a living aspect of Yugoslav culture. The period from the proclamation of the 6 January Dictatorship in 1929 until the death of King Alexander in 1934 was marked by the concept of “integral Yugoslavism” In 1929, the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes changed its name to the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. The political situation during this time influenced cultural activities that expressed a sense of panSlavic cultural closeness and South Slavic unity. The appointment of Ivo Franić as the director of the Museum in 1935 marked a period of significant changes. Franić's appointment as director occurred after the Yugoslav National Party came to power. He advocated for monarchist centralism and integral Yugoslavism. In terms of the methods of collecting materials for the Collection, there weren't many differences from the previous period. The Museum continued to gather objects through a network of commissioners, friends, and collaborators from all over Yugoslavia, as well as through fieldwork in Croatia. During this time, the commissioners were often teachers and representatives of rural associations. However, significant changes occurred in the interpretation of the material. Franić emphasized the museum's task in Yugoslavia to demonstrate that all South Slavs were connected by a common origin. The goal of the new "reorganized" exhibition was to present national history through objects of folk culture. Within this historical context, the objects were meant to bear witness to the continuous existence of peasant culture over long periods. The emphasis on the DinaricBalkan collection in a large exhibition hall on the ground floor, where costumes were indicators of the kinship of the peoples in that region, reflects Franić's understanding of the nation, which was supported by the central authority of the time. The Dinaric anthropological type was considered the ideal representative of the nation. After the fall of the last Stojadinović government and the emergence of new political options which led to the establishment of the Banovina of Croatia, Milovan Gavazzi assumed the position of acting director in 1939. He was also a professor at the Department of Ethnology at the Faculty of Philosophy at Zagreb University. His political orientation aligned with his professional and scientific insights. He believed that the Croatian national identity should be promoted through education and by strengthening autonomous Croatian institutions. Through his scientific work, he related to both institutional and non-institutional efforts to shape and empower Croatian culture. Gavazzi's research focused on the ethnographic portrayal of the Croats, and he considered the key determinant of Croatian identity to be “the awareness of Croats of all of them belonging to one and the same individuality of the Croatian name”. At the same time, he pointed out the fundamental characteristics that Croats had acquired “in their ancestral homeland”, which were represented by “Proto-Slavic or Proto-Croatian” features. The questions he sought to answer pertained to the origins, antiquity, provenance, development, and kinship, as well as the geographical distribution of individual cultural elements that constitute a culture. His goal was the reconstruction of Croatian culture. By synthesizing established facts, he classified the material on costumes in the region of Croatia into culturalgeographical areas and cultural-historical layers. During the period between the First and Second World Wars, the peasantry in Croatia achieved its peak influence on the political stage, due to the efforts of the Croatian Peasant Party (Hrvatska seljačka stranka or HSS). During his tenure, Gavazzi collaborated closely with Peasant Concord (Seljačka sloga), a cultural and educational organization aligned with the HSS. The primary form of cultural activity for Peasant Concord was the organization of festivals celebrating peasant culture. During these festivals, experts from the Museum, who were part of the committees responsible for assessing the authenticity of costumes, influenced the shaping of perceptions of “authentic” folk art from specific regions. These festivals also provided opportunities for intensive ethnological research. The collection continued through research with the help of new museum collaborators in the field, during this period the members of the Peasant Concord, especially doctors and former students. During the Second World War (April 1941 - May 1945), Božidar Širola held the position of the Museum's director. The Museum remained open to the public until 1943, after which the permanent exhibition was dismantled, and Museum objects were stored in crates in basement shelters. Even in wartime conditions, the Museum continued to collect and document materials. During the war, ethnographic items that had been confiscated from Jews and members of other nationalities were brought to the Museum from collection centres. After the Second World War, the new government led by the Communist Party established a socialist system of governance inspired by the Soviet model. In the new Yugoslav community, Croatia became one of the six republics within the federal state. The government's policies and ideologies encouraged Yugoslav patriotism but also recognized and supported the national identities and interests of individual peoples and nationalities within the country. Marijana Gušić became the director of the Museum in 1946, during the challenging post-war circumstances. She had an ideological affinity with the new state regime and sought to align the museum's policies with the prevailing state policies at that time. Changes in the museum's policy, compared to its original framework as defined by Tkalčić, can be observed during her tenure. M. Gušić primarily emphasized the preservation aspect of folk materials “of our people”. She placed a strong emphasis on safeguarding ethnographic materials in Croatia, which she regarded as a “scientific instrument” and a “cultural monument”. Changes in the priorities reflect the transformations that occurred in rural communities after the Second World War. Despite the changes experienced by rural populations, the focus remained on collecting older rural clothes with distinctive regional characteristics and/or aesthetic qualities. During this period, research was conducted in areas of national interest, including Istria, parts of Dalmatia, and islands that had become part of Yugoslavia, specifically Croatia. Research also took place in nationally/ethnically sensitive areas such as the hinterland of Zadar, Kordun, and Banija, as well as in Hrvatsko Zagorje, which was explained by the urgency of fieldwork in these regions due to the implementation of the first five-year plan, which encompassed these areas as well. The new permanent exhibition opened to the public with an accompanying catalogue titled “Commentary on the Exhibited Material (Tumač građe)” in 1955. Despite efforts to create a new exhibition based on the principles of historical materialism that would significantly differ from the previous one, in some parts, the result was very similar. In the exhibition, given the predominance of textile materials in the Museum costumes were predominantly displayed. Representative costumes from the region of Croatia and examples of folk craftsmanship were now categorized according to cultural-geographical zones. This exhibition, in a way, determined the way ethnographic materials would be presented in the future, both in subsequent permanent exhibitions and in temporary exhibitions. The first exhibition after the Second World War in which the Museum participated, along with other museums from the territory of the former state was titled “Folk Art of Yugoslavia”. It ran from 1949 to 1951 and toured museums in major European cities. This exhibition continued the pre-war tradition of showcasing the culture of Yugoslav nations by displaying peasant culture which presented Yugoslavia as a modern nation. The same or similar costumes that represented the Kingdom of Yugoslavia now had the role of representing the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia and the various traditions of its people. The cultural revival, partly triggered by the liberalization and democratization of the 1960s, introduced new orientations to Croatian culture and politics, moving away from rigid Marxist concepts of development toward new values and lifestyles. In these changed circumstances, Jelka Radauš Ribarić became the director of the Museum in 1964. J. Radauš Ribarić, like her predecessors, considered collecting to be the most important part of the museum's policy. From her perspective, the importance of this function was described as an action that serves to save the remaining objects of traditional culture in rural areas. Studying material culture during that time also involved acquiring knowledge of skills such as weaving, embroidery, and lacemaking. Documenting these techniques became an essential skill. The most crucial information was identifying features that indicated affiliation with a particular cultural area. Since typical characteristics were favoured over individuality, biographical details about the collected objects were considered unnecessary. Stripping objects of their biographies contributed to a one-sided interpretation within the context of their regional and local significance, and, on the other hand, allowed these objects to be attributed with any meaning. J. Radauš Ribarić approached the study of costumes comprehensively, much like M. Gušić, examining them from both a cultural-historical and cultural-artistic perspective, while also considering their societal role and symbolic meanings. In the interpretation and classification of costumes, she primarily followed Gavazzi's cultural-geographical and culturalhistorical divisions, emphasizing older elements in their design. J. Radauš Ribarić translated her understanding of costumes into the creation of a new permanent exhibition. Under her leadership, a team of experts worked on the exhibition from 1968 to 1972, simultaneously with the Museum's renovation. However, the new permanent exhibition did not represent a conceptual departure from the previous one. Until the 1970s, ethnology in Croatia focused on the study of traditional culture, which, in the context of the Museum, meant collecting, preserving, interpreting, and presenting elements of rural culture. Despite the changes they underwent over time, these elements were often seen as static, implying their long duration and relative immutability, primarily in terms of their form. Ways of life in rural communities, clothing, concepts of beauty, and more were considered to demonstrate continuity and immutability over long periods. In the new exhibition, costumes were the most prevalent materials. The focus was on displaying the clothing of rural communities from the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The basic idea of the original exhibition concept is still visible today and is based on the division of Croatia into cultural zones, within which ceremonial and ritual costume specimens are presented by region. The exhibit aimed to emphasize the origins of different cultural phenomena, with a focus on "authentic" and "indigenous" elements. The costume exhibit was conceived as an expression of the Croatian national identity through various regional and local identities, with the Museum contributing to the understanding and shaping of these identities. In 1976, Mario Petrić became the director of the Museum. He directed the Museum's policy towards scientific work, with the intention of organizing the Museum as a scientific unit. For the first time in the Museum's history, the collection of material culture objects was not considered the most important function. Now, the focus was on documenting and registering rural culture phenomena. At the initiative of the Croatian Ethnological Society, the Museum organized team research on traditional forms of village culture in the Zagreb region, and during its twenty-year duration, there was a growing recognition of the need to record changes in the rural way of life. During this period, more emphasis was placed on the changes that were happening and less on the loss and decline of folk culture phenomena. While researching the Zagreb region, some newer clothing items were acquired, which bear witness to changes in the lives of rural communities. On the other hand, the Museum collaborated with local communities on the revaluation of their traditional clothing, measures for its protection, preservation, and the promotion of intangible cultural heritage. Toward the end of the 1980s, there was a growing recognition of tradition as something important for maintaining one's cultural identity in the face of modernization processes. This led to a different understanding of ethnographic objects, with a shift towards their symbolic significance. Material culture began to be viewed as an expression of belonging to a community. Costumes were analysed as symbols of local culture and local identity with national significance. The value of material culture was reconsidered from the perspective of its bearers. At the same time, in Western Europe, there was a questioning of museum practices, and ethnographic museums were criticized for presenting a false, romantically nostalgic image of the past of rural communities that had never actually existed, as well as for being apolitical and lacking criticality in their presentation. The presentation of objects was based on the continuity of the permanent exhibition established in the previous period. Temporary exhibitions focused on the noticeable characteristics of objects, which were valued according to established museum classification. At the beginning of the 1990s, dramatic changes occurred in Croatia. With the transition to a multi-party democracy, the secession from the Yugoslav federation, and the establishment of an independent state, Croatia faced a war that resulted in significant casualties, many refugees, and the occupation of nearly a third of its territory. During the war, the Museum continued to operate, but the permanent exhibition was disbanded, and together with other items, it was stored in the storage rooms on the ground floor of the building. Damodar Frlan, who had been the curator of the Collection of Non-European Cultures, became the director of the Museum in 1990. Upon taking office, he aimed to steer the Museum toward new approaches in ethnology and cultural anthropology and introduce new museum practices. In his vision of museum policy, he emphasized the creation of a new permanent exhibition alongside the building's renovation, placing collections into proper storage facilities and participation of the Museum in European projects. He considered exhibition activities as the most crucial part of his policy, with the goal of reshaping the Museum's public perception and increasing its influence in the fields of ethnology and museology. The wartime events and the change in the political system were reflected in the Museum in various ways. National characteristics of cultural phenomena began to be emphasized. There was talk of Croatian traditional culture and Croatian ethnographic heritage, Croatian Christmas, and Croatian folk costumes. The wartime events, destruction, and devastation of villages led the new director to emphasize “collecting the remaining traditional materials” as part of the museum's policy, appealing to the awareness of citizens. From 1990 to 1995, the focus of acquisitions was on materials from areas directly affected by the war. Many refugees donated or sold items to the Museum that they managed to bring as a connection to their homeland when leaving their homes. Most of such material consisted of clothing and textiles. During the 1990s and 2000s, collaborative museum research was conducted in the Žumberak region, Pisarovina, Gorski Kotar, and the vicinity of Ivanić Grad. The research was organized with the goal of “determining the state of the remaining traditional elements in the surveyed area.” However, from the early 2000s, Damodar Frlan began to talk about collecting objects of everyday culture and expanding the scope of museum studies. Given this orientation, the Museum began to address the topic of “collecting the present”. The expansion of the scope of ethnographic research in spatial and temporal contexts, as well as those related to one's own culture, initiated discussions about redefining the concept of an “ethnographic object”. The Museum then began discussions on establishing criteria for collecting contemporary objects for museum collections. The most significant indicators of socio-political changes were thematic exhibitions. Within certain exhibitions, media were used to collect objects related to the exhibition's theme, and interpretations and stories from the owners accompanied their documentation, as seen in the exhibition “What Good Shoes! A Walk through the History of Footwear” (2006). The objects collected for this exhibition couldn't fit into any of the existing collections, which prompted the establishment of the Collection of Contemporary Clothes. This collection now includes artisan and designer fashion items, contemporary clothes, ready-made garments, and objects of popular culture. The presentation of Croatian ethnographic heritage to the world was one of the initiatives of the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Croatia during the 2000s. Most of the objects borrowed from the Museum were items that had already represented Croatia in exhibitions before and after World War II. Presenting Croatian heritage with the same objects created a unique cultural repertoire through which the national culture and identity based on folk heritage were represented. When looking at the Textile and Clothes Collection as a whole, one can observe the complexity of the process of its formation. The values and possibilities that the Collection holds today differ from those that initially motivated its creation. Through the Collection, we can understand ethnic and cultural diversity, it can assist us in discussions about identities, in comprehending time, objects, and places, and provide evidence of various historical circumstances. The items in the Collection can symbolize relationships, evoke memories, or create aesthetic and emotional experiences. Complex cultural practices integrated wide networks of people across different times, connecting various places and objects. Thus, the Collection consists not only of material objects but also of social relationships. This includes people from the communities where the objects originate, various gatherers, collectors and their heirs, curators, ethnologists, and anthropologists, as well as individuals who encounter these objects in museums (through exhibitions and workshops, or through other media). It is their motivations, desires, and worldviews that collectively shape the Museum's history. |
