Almaty: Print-S LLP, 2009. 1263 p.

Kokand historiography has been studied for a long time. A special contribution to its study was made by the author of the book under review - Timur Kasymovich Beisembiev (he gives a list of his works on the topic (45 articles and books) on pages 1033-1036). The monograph is actually a concentrated and enriched result of the researcher's previous works (according to the author, "the fruit of 26 years of research", p. 65).

The main part of the book consists of three chapters. In the first chapter, the author described the history of the study of Kokand historiography, gave a brief overview of the chronicles, their classification, offered his observations on the internal relationship of the works of the Khanate period (of course, mainly Kokand authors) and attempted to determine the place of the Kokand chronicles in the historiographical tradition of the East, unfortunately, without extensive comparisons. T. K. Beisembiev's analysis of "external" and "internal" (mutual) compilations in the works of Kokand historiographers is interesting. In other words, the author identified blocks in his works that were borrowed from earlier authors and, in fact, from "his" Kokand historians. The analysis is accompanied by detailed tables, which allowed the author to draw general conclusions about compilation methods.

In the second chapter, the author provides an overview of the socio-economic, partly political and ethnic history of Kokand, also slightly expanding the material and facts published in his previous works. Intriguingly named is the third paragraph of this chapter - "Ideology", which is a rather superficial study of the ways and sources of legitimizing the power of the Ming. More precisely, this chapter deals with the ideology of political legitimation, which the author cites from his previous works, excluding only conclusions drawn in the style of the Soviet historical school. Nevertheless, it is useful for modern researchers that this chapter provides solid material on fictitious and real Ming family ties, extensive comparisons with the precedents of genealogical reconstructions (again artificial and real) of other dynasties of Central / Central Asia, primarily the Genghisids. Here are also reviews and interpretations of various variations of the legends about the origin of the Ming from the" son " of Zahir ad-din Babur-Altun Bishik. Interesting (though not indisputable) is T. K. Beisembiev's conclusion about the "triumph of the Chagatai state idea in Ferghana" (p. 224), which will be discussed in more detail below.

The author's observations on reconstructions of local dynasties of their own origin are enriched with interesting historical and cultural comparisons, especially in relation to the perception of the Russian Empire's conquest of the Crimea and the Caucasus, examples from the history of medieval France, etc. In the author's interpretation, these comparisons can provide an interesting perspective for theoretical understanding, especially for similar justifications of sovereign rights in dynasties separated by historical, regional, cultural, and religious traditions.

The third chapter of the monograph is devoted to a brief overview of the political history of Kokand and neighboring states and independent possessions, also borrowed to a greater extent from the author's previous works. Here, T. K. Beisembiev offers a list and a fairly detailed chronological classification and repertoire of the content of sources (pp. 344-491). This review can significantly facilitate the work of those researchers who will continue to study Kokand historiography.

The conclusion of the book is mostly a summary of the author's thoughts on possible prospects for further research of Kokand historiography. Here (p. 326) he, in my opinion, quite rightly suggests revising the validity of the thesis about "acute Anglo-Russian contradictions in Central Asia" on the grounds that they are not mentioned in the Kokand chronicles. This thesis of T. K. Beisembiev can be confirmed by a number of articles of the famous "Turkestan collection" (see especially the series of articles: "On the Central Asian issue". Leading articles of "Birzhevye Vedomosti". N 16, 124, 135, 141, 160, 163,239, 273, 306) [Turkestan collection, pp. 157-219].

T. K. Beisembiev identifies two priority areas (as he believes): directions for further development of the works of Kokand authors and the history of the region: within the first direction (source studies), a separate study of all available Kokand chronicles is proposed.-

scientific publications, translations, posting on the Internet, etc.; within the second (research) one, it is proposed to " develop those problems that the Kokand chronicles solve... could have been taken as a basis." Such problems include, for example, "the history of the Kokand Khanate and the history of Central Asia in the XVIII-XIX centuries" (p. 326). Then, quite rightly, the question is raised about the "compilation parts" of the works of the historiographers of Kokand, in order to identify their connection with the previous historiographic traditions of the Muslim world. Since K. Beisembiev does not exclude that in the compilation parts "some information of the Kokand chronicles may turn out to be quite original and even unique" (p. 327).

The special value of the peer-reviewed book is that it can be used as an extensive and detailed guide to the political and genealogical history of Kokand and some other states in the region. The monograph contains useful information in the field of comparative source studies (unfortunately, they do not take into account modern comparative methods in studies of Islamic historiography), the repertoire of chronicles, the economic and cultural life of the khanate, palace life, the " table of ranks "(ranks and titles) in the Kokand and partly neighboring khanates, etc. in large-scale appendices (pp. 21-64, 344-1004), which actually represent a more extended version of the "Indices" published by T. K. Beisembiev in Japan (Beisembiev, 2008). The detailed indexes to the texts also make the book very useful and easy to use, despite its solid volume and slightly confusing structure. I will add that some applications look superfluous in the study (for example, well-known genealogical trees of the Afghan Durrani or Iranian dynasties). Instead, it would be more useful to expand the research part of the monograph that is directly related to the topic stated in the title.

A. K. Beisembiev's voluminous, extensive, and solid research evokes a positive reaction, but at the same time it encourages scientific discussions and leaves room for other points of view (in fact, this was one of the author's tasks, judging by his numerous remarks). Therefore, I will allow myself to formulate some thoughts on the hypotheses and statements expressed by the author, as well as to offer my own vision of the prospects for studying the history of Kokand.

First of all, I would like to focus on T. K. Beisembiev's statement about the "triumph of the Chagatai state idea" in genealogical reconstructions of the Kokand Mings and other dynasties (p. 223-225); in another place, this "idea" is called the "political and legal ideology of Genghisism" (p.325). However, it seems to me that the genealogical reconstructions of Kokand historians are rather personified. They distinguish not a dynasty (Chagataids or Timurids), but specific personalities, primarily Amir Timur, sometimes Genghis Khan, as fairly mythologized examples of"firm and just power". Further, these reconstructions, while remaining a way of legitimizing the dynasty, took the forms created by specific official or independent authors. How they were perceived in society, we can not yet say for sure. In fact ,the" state ideas " that prevailed among the Ming, as well as among neighboring dynasties, are still far from being fully understood (this attempt was made by the author of this review, see [Babadzhanov, 2010]).

Unfortunately, in the mentioned section "Ideology", as well as in the Conclusion (where the author outlines the prospects for further research) there was no place to analyze the Islamic sources of legitimacy of the government. Meanwhile, such an attempt to Islamize one's own genealogy (by fabricating Timur's genealogy with the descendants of the Prophet) took place in the case of 'Umar Khan (with Isfaragi and then repeating these genealogical creatives with 'Avaz-Muhammad [Babadzhanov, 2010, pp. 332-338]), which is also noted in the author's description of the repertoire of sources. Meanwhile, the legitimation of the Ming's own right to power was not limited only to the" search " for a legitimate pedigree, primarily related to Amir Timur. In this case, one should not ignore the religious context of the works, which is still far from a sound and extensive understanding.

I would like to add the following to T. K. Beisembiev's thoughts on the future prospects of studying Kokand historiography. Other methods of research and analysis of Muslim sources should also be applied to Kokand historiography. It is especially important to analyze it as a single and at the same time diverse historiographic corpus. At the same time, it is necessary to identify "narrative complexes" in it, to study the internal dynamics of texts, their semantic connections with chronologically and geographically close and distant histories, as suggested by Marilyn R. Waldman [Waldman, 1980].

It is very important to keep in mind the motives of the author as the protagonist of the ideology of a certain class, group, clan, high-ranking person, etc. In the aspect of political legitimation, for almost any Kokand author, the "correct/fair" nature of his actions is an indispensable basis for his "building" (choosing) the optimal image of the ruler. In this approach, as Julia S. Meisami noted, it is important to take into account the propaganda motives of the authors, "because their works are closely connected with the legitimization of their rulers or emphases on the special status of their region and its inhabitants" [Meisami, 1999, p.296-297]. At the same time (if it concerns mainly unofficial histories), the moral rhetoric of historiographers must necessarily be taken into account [ibid., p. 5-10, 67-72]. I will add that, as a rule, such rhetoric is associated with confessional assessments and worldviews. Therefore, this aspect is also important in the research of Kokand historiography. It is also important to focus on other historiographical issues: the style of presentation of political events, identifying in them the principles of combining Islamic and Genghisid traditions, the authors ' understanding of dynastic genealogy, its legitimation, the form of criticism of some and the elevation of other rulers, etc.

In any case, the theoretical understanding of Kokand historiography is still far from complete. In my opinion, the reviewed monograph represents another stage of research, when the study of sources retained a descriptive method or approaches exclusively in terms of restoring the political, economic and social context of the history of a particular state (khanate) of the region. In other words, thanks to the solid material reworked by the author, the understanding of Kokand history can be brought to a new level. Although the peer-reviewed publication has not yet completed the theoretical understanding of Kokand historiography.

Nevertheless, T. K. Beisembiev's book can become a manual for specialists (for example, as a reference book on the late (pre-colonial) history of the region, dynasties, official duties of bureaucratic structures, etc.) and it should be considered as a brilliant completion of the stage of descriptive historical and historiographical reconstructions of the past region.

I must warn you that with my comments and suggestions, I would in no way want to cast doubt on the exceptional usefulness and importance of the monograph under review. I repeat that T. K. Beisembiyev's achievements in studying the history and historiography of Kokand are exceptional. This kind of painstaking and extensive systematization of the material, informative saturation, thoroughness and broadest coverage is the rarest (at present) phenomenon for historical and even more source studies. I am sure that this and other studies on the history of Kokand and the region, which came from the pen of T. K. Beisembiev, have stimulated and will continue to stimulate other scientists.

list of literature

Babadzhanov B. M. Kokand Khanate: power, politics, religion. Tokyo-Tashkent, 2010. Turkestan collection, vol. 6 / Comp. V. I. Mezhov, L., 1967.

Beiscmbiev T.K. Annotated Indices to the Kokand Chronicles. Tokyo: ILCAA, 2008. Meisami J.S. Persian Historiography to the end twelfth century. Edinburgh, 1999.

Waldman M.R. Toward a Theory of Historical Narrative - A Case Study in Perso-Islamicate Historiography. Ohio: Ohio Univ. press, 1980.

Постоянный адрес данной публикации: