Jüri Linnus – teaduse kirglik eestkõneleja ERMis

In this article, I examine the role and contribution of Jüri Linnus (1926–1995) as an organizer and leader of research at the Estonian National Museum. The central sources for the article are a synthesis of materials from the National Museum’s official archive and the National Archives’ personal files archive, on one hand, with recollections from Linnus himself and his contemporaries on the other. Linnus worked for the National Museum for three decades (1956–1986), shaping the museum’s public image and the internal organization of its work. Linnus was also a principal ethnography teacher at the University of Tartu in the 1950s and 1960s, playing a decisive role in bringing younger people to the speciality. Linnus emphasized the importance of maintaining and developing research activity as a component of museum operations during a time that the structural and economic framework for the institution’s activity did not favour it. He had an important role in extricating the museum from its deep nadir caused by Stalinist repressions. In this way, he was instrumental in launching the tradition of annual conferences at the museum and reinstating regular publication of the museum’s yearbook, both of which turned into signature undertakings for the National Museum. Linnus’s mission also extended to maintenance of the museum collections and advocating for their in-depth scientific study. Although he held leading positions throughout his career, he was unable to fully realize his capabilities as either administrator or scholar. On one hand, this was because of his family background as the son of Ferdinand Linnus, who had been politcally repressed under Soviet regime. He was also held back by his strong personality traits – his sharp mind was accompanied by a sharp tongue, which in combination with an inflexible leadership style led to tensions with colleagues. Although Linnus was productive as both researcher as well as organizer all career long, publishing many research articles, the latter was overshadowed somewhat by his organizational duties. Analysis of his research works are beyond the scope of this article and deserves separate treatment. Nor does this article cover Linnus’s active role in society; that, too, will have to await further study.