Prijuostės polisemiškumas tradicinėje kaimo bendruomenės pasaulėžiūroje

LTPasiremiant archyvine, ikonografine medžiaga, publikuotais šaltiniais, taip pat XIX–XX a. pirmosios pusės ir XX a. pabaigos etnologinių ir liaudies meno tyrimų duomenimis, straipsnyje nagrinėjamas prijuostės polisemiškumas tradicinėje kaimo bendruomenės pasaulėžiūroje. Pasitelkus aprašomąjį, lyginamąjį ir interpretacinį tyrimo metodus, bandoma gretinti lietuvių, baltarusių ir lenkų prijuosčių panaudojimo variantus, išryškinti analogijas ir skirtumus. XIX–XX a. pirmosios pusės prijuosčių funkcijų įvairovė lietuvių ir gretimų tautų tradicinėje kaimo bendruomenės pasaulėžiūroje Lietuvos etnologų, menotyrininkų, kultūros istorikų iki šiol plačiau nenagrinėta. Detaliau beveik netirta ir prijuostės, kaip kultūros objekto, simbolika. Ši priežastis ir buvo postūmis panagrinėti prijuostę, atskleidžiant ir pristatant ją kaip daugiaprasmę visumą, kurios esmė ir nusakoma jos struktūros sudėtingumu, o struktūra – jos pagrindinėmis funkcijomis. Tyrimu siekiama papildyti semantines bei lyginamąsias lietuvių liaudies meno studijas, kurios yra aktualios Lietuvai, visais laikais išgyvenusiai kitų kraštų, ypač kaimyninių, poveikį. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Gyvenimo ciklo apeigos; Prijuostė; Tradicinis liaudies kostiumas; Tradicinė dėvėsena; Tradicinė pasaulėžiūra; Apron; Life cycle rituals; Rites of life cycle; Traditional folk costume; Traditional way of clothing; Traditional worldview.

ENOn the grounds of data from various sources and parallels from the international research on apron / textiles, the article focuses on the uses of apron in the rituals performed by the traditional rural community during the life-cycle and calendar festivals, disassociating from actions related to the religious symbols and the vernacular religious practices. In the 19th–beginning of the 20th century in Lithuania, just like in the neighboring countries, the festive apron used to perform both the utilitarian, the social denotative (a clear distinctive sign, providing information on its wearer not only as an individual, but also as a representative of a relevant social group, i.e. indicating the ethnic identity or belonging to a certain ethnographic region), the ethical (oriented and related to observations of the surroundings and the female behavior, revealing her values and judgments), the aesthetic (shaping the harmony of the traditional costume as a whole), and the apotropaic (ensuring the magic protection of both physical and spiritual state of the woman – the procreator, responsible for giving birth to the healthy offspring) function. In the worldview of the traditional rural community, the apron used to be endowed with additional connotations as well: it used to be related to various beliefs, most frequently associated with fertility. Such peculiarities of its use could most distinctly be visible in the wedding and birthing rites. In case of the upset living rhythms, like overdue weddings, or girls’ inability to get properly married, the apron used to become a significant attribute expressing the idea of fertility.Therefore the apron used to perform an important role during the calendar rites; it used to be spread on the ground / on the straw / on the church floor as a material on which a person was supposed to kneel down to carry out the ritual: to kiss the earth through the apron. It can thus be assumed, that such a custom was meant to invoke or ensure success for the coming year, with clear orientation towards the prospective marriage. Thus the discussed polysemic cultural object of the 19th – the first half of the 20th century – the apron – provides information not only on its direct use and functional purposes, but also on its other meanings, not dependant on its function. By acquiring the quality of symbol or sign, the apron used to be included into semiotic systems, communicating certain meaning and information. Thus not only meanings characteristic to the ethnic identity of the people used to be expressed (knowledge preserved by way of the living practices, enabling better conveyance of the national identity and peculiarity), but also the universal essentials, spotted not only in the worldview of the traditional Lithuanian rural community, but also in that of the neighboring countries. [From the publication]