Erhch.: A. Ochir, B. Enkhtuvshin. Улаанбаатар: ADMON компанид эхийг бэлтгж хэвлэв, 2003. 420 с*

The first generalizing work on the history of Mongolia was a joint work of Russian and Mongolian historians - "History of the Mongolian People's Republic", published in two languages in 1954 and received State Prizes of the USSR and the MNR. This collective monograph was a reference book for a whole generation of social scientists in Russia and Mongolia, as well as for a wide readership interested in the ancient and distinctive Mongolian history and culture. It went through a second edition in Mongolian in 1966, in Russian in 1967, and in English in 1973, each time in an updated and expanded form. In 1987, this one-volume book was published in Russian for the third time.

The rapid growth of social studies in the Mongolian People's Republic allowed Mongolian scientists to prepare and publish the History of the Mongolian People's Republic in three volumes in the Mongolian language in 1966-1969. For its time, it was a fundamental work, sustained, of course, like all editions of the one-volume book, in the spirit of the Marxist ideology that prevailed in our countries.

In the context of democratic changes in the world and in Mongolia itself, the renewal of spiritual life and the rise of national consciousness, there was a need to revise many ideas about historical problems and modern life in the country. In this regard, the President of Mongolia N. Bagabandi in January 1999 issued a decree "On writing anew and publishing the history of Mongolia". An editorial board was formed consisting of Prof. A. Ochir (Chairman), acad. Ch. Dalai, academicians N. Ishzhamts, Sh. Natsagdorj, B. Shirendib (now, unfortunately, deceased), Doctor, and more recently Academician Zh. Boldbatar, doctors L. Jamsran, Ts Ishdorj, D. Tsevendorj. The Council was able to attract leading historians, archaeologists, ethnographers, economists and other specialists to its work, and in 2001-2003 promptly issued all five volumes of the publication. Each of them reflected the current level of study of the corresponding periods-from ancient times to almost the present day.

The object of my review was the fourth volume of this publication, which best meets my research interests and competence. It is dedicated to the period of the new history of Mongolia, which, according to modern Mongolian historiography, spans a little more than three centuries: the beginning of the XVII century-the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. This periodization and the corresponding chronological framework of the volume became a new word in itself, because earlier in the works of Mongolian authors, including the collective three-volume "History of the MNR", the predecessor of the five-volume book, it was customary to refer the end of modern history to 1917, to the victory of the October Revolution in Russia.

I will immediately note that the novelty and new approaches are reflected in the structure of the volume and in the content of a number of its sections.

So, structurally, the volume is divided into two main parts, which, as is done in the entire five-volume volume, are preceded by an introductory extensive review of sources and literature on the history of Mongolia of the specified period.

Part I, "Mongol Resistance to the Conquest of Mongolia by the Manchu Qing Empire", consists of four chapters and is mainly devoted to the heroic struggle of the Mongols against the Manchu expansion, for the unification, freedom and independence of their homeland. For the first time, these events are highlighted against the broad background of the general international situation in Central Asia, intra-Mongolian, Mongol-Tibetan, and Mongol-Kazakh relations, relations with the Ming Dynasty in China, and the establishment and development of ties with Russia.

According to the concept, almost all the principalities and khanates of Southern and Northern Mongolia and Dzungaria took part in this struggle at different stages and to varying degrees.-

* History of Mongolia. Vol. 4 (XVII-early XX centuries) / Ed. by A. Ochir, B. Enkhtuvshin. Ulaanbaatar: ADMON & Co., 2003. 420 p.

page 174

The main leaders of the resistance were Chakhar Ligdan Khutukhta khan (1581-1637), Khalkha Tsogt Khuntaiji (1581-1637), head of the Oirat Dzungarian Khanate Galdan Boshoktu Khan (1644-1697) and, of course, "national heroes": the initiator and leader of a major popular uprising in Dzungaria in 1755-1758, a well-born Oirat Prince of Amursan (1717 - 1754) and a native of the Khotogoit Khalkha tribe, Shadarvan, Efu Chingunzhav (1710-1757), who in the same years led a broad anti-Manchu movement in Khalkha.

The lives of the first two of these historical leaders, their political, military, and cultural activities, and most importantly, all the vicissitudes of their confrontation with the Qing are discussed in detail, using rare chronicle and archival materials, in chapter I, "The Mongols at the beginning of the XVII century, the Manchu takeover of Southern Mongolia"¹, and Galdan - in chapter III, "The Takeover of Southern Mongolia by the Manchus". Khalkha Manchus", and the description of the final stage of his dramatic struggle with the Manchus in the 1690s is quite rightly highlighted in a separate paragraph of this chapter. I note that here (p.132) there is also a disagreement with the opinion of "some researchers" (a footnote is given to the work of I. Ya. Zlatkin [Zlatkin, 1983, p. 188]), according to which Galdan acted on instructions from Lhasa and owes his success in domestic and foreign policy only to them. Based on historical facts and sources, it is shown that he was not a pro-Tibetan, but a completely independent "prominent military and political figure who left a deep mark on the political and cultural history of not only Mongolia, but also the entire Central Asia" (p.135).

The activities of Amursana and Chingunzhav, as the authors write, fighters for "the liberation of the Motherland from Manchu domination, the revival of an independent Mongol state with its own capital, its own army, and its own tax system" (pp. 158-159) are discussed in chapter IV, devoted to the history of the Manchu conquest of the Dzungarian Khanate and, mainly, the anti-Manchu uprising of 1755-1758 He described it as "the biggest event in the struggle of the Mongols for independence in the XVII-XVIII centuries "(p.157)^.2

As you know, the Mongols were defeated in the fight against the Manchus. The authors of the volume (J. Galbadrakh, D. Dashbadrakh, G. Dashlyam, N. Ishzhamts, A. Ochir, S. Tsolmon) see the reasons for this in the political (note not in the feudal) fragmentation of the country, in the endless feuds between the Mongolian khanates and principalities, in the impossibility of uniting Mongolia in those historical conditions by either political or military means Which were mostly used by both Ligdan Khan and Galdan, in their underestimation of the dynamism, power and strength of the young and strong state created by the Manchus - first the Late Jin (1616-1643), and then the Qing Empire (p.67). This is, so to speak, an internal series of reasons. The external aspect consisted in the aggressiveness of the Manchus, their skillful use of the "divide and rule" policy borrowed from China and playing on contradictions in the Mongol camp, in the huge military superiority of their army, which relied on the human and material resources of China, and in the defeat of Galdan and then the entire Dzungarian Khanate, which also used the forces and means of Southern Mongolia, Khalkha and Hamy.

However, the authors ' very unsubstantiated explanation of the reasons for Galdan's defeat is objectionable: "The Russian state, which was steadily expanding its zones of influence in Siberia and Central Asia, secretly pursued a policy of overthrowing Galdan" (p.134). In support of this, the work does not cite a single fact, moreover, it contradicts the authors ' assessments of Galdan's relations with Russia as generally "good - neighborly" (p. 89-90), as well as the evidence they give of Galdan's desire to conclude a kind of anti-Manchurian military alliance with the Russians (p. 129).. As the authors have repeatedly noted, rumors about this

¹ The main interest is information about Tsogt Khuntaiji's bright personality-a politician, poet, educator, builder of monasteries and urban settlements. For example, there are his poems in honor of Ligdan Khan, carved on a rock, photos of the entrance stone gates to his "White House", the story of his expulsion from Khalkha for adhering to the sect of" red caps " (pp. 68-70). A separate section is devoted to his struggle with the Oirat Gushi Khan Turubaykhu (1582-1655) for domination of Tibet.

^{Chapter 2} almost verbatim repeats sections 2 - 5 (5-not completely) of Chapter 4 of the second volume of the three-volume History of the MNR, which also describes the events of 1755-1758. (author-N. Ishzhamts), which seems justified, because the late academician was and continues to be posthumously the most prominent expert on this problem, who specifically studied it in his unique monograph [Ishzhamts, 1962]. Preservation of the author's text and the name of N. Ishzhamts among the authors of the volume is also a tribute to the memory of one of the outstanding Mongolian historians of the XX century.

page 175

they greatly frightened the Tsins and forced them to hurry up with the signing of the Treaty of Nerchinsk in 1689 (pp. 123, 124, 336). The documents of Russian archives also convincingly show that by observing neutrality and not interfering in the Oirato-Khalkha-Manchurian conflict, the Russians de facto morally supported Galdan, and calm and peace on the borders of Russian possessions with Dzungaria and Khalkha in the 1690s gave Galdan an additional opportunity to resist the Qing [Golman, 1997].

If the entire first part of the reviewed volume, with the exception of a concise but capacious description of the socio-economic situation of the Dzungarian Khanate (p. 94-105) is in chapter II, this is, in fact, the political history of Mongolia of the XVII-first half of the XVIII century, the coverage of which, of course, echoes, and sometimes repeats the materials of the corresponding sections of the second Since the first two volumes of the History of the Mongolian People's Republic dated 1968, Part II, which is large in terms of chronological coverage and volume, "Mongolia in the period of Manchurian rule," is of a problem-themed, socio-cultural nature, of course, with necessary excursions into history. Both compositionally and in terms of content, this part looks unconventional: such topics as administrative arrangements, social structure, economy, taxes and duties (Chapter I), religion and monasteries (Chapter II), foreign Chinese and Russian trade in Mongolia (Chapter III), life, struggle and movements are highlighted in separate sections the Mongols (Chapter IV), the culture of Mongolia (chapter V), and finally the formation of Mongolia's indigenous borders (Chapter VI).

These topics cover almost all areas of the situation of Mongolia in the era of more than two centuries of Manchu rule, and in their coverage the general attitudes and positions of the authors, the characteristics and features of the entire volume are most clearly visible. They, in my opinion, are as follows::

1. The idea of common historical destinies of the population of Inner and Outer Mongolia in modern times. It is not explicitly stated, but it actually runs through all the chapters of this volume. It is particularly evident in the description of the Manchu policy on the national, more precisely, tribal, military-administrative division and settlement of Mongolian peoples in Outer and Inner Mongolia, Tuva, Barga and Xinjiang (p. 163-176), in the characterization of anti-Manchu actions, most of which is devoted to uprisings and movements in Inner Mongolia (p. 262 - 273), in the chapter on culture and borders.

2. Abandoning the class approach and replacing it with a comparative historical one, simply stating the social relations that developed during the period under review without their social characteristics. The comparative-historical approach is clearly shown, for example, in the scheme of dividing Mongolian society into three classes proposed in the section "Social Structure": the highest (hereditary tribal aristocracy); Khoshun nobility (zasag noyons, taiji, etc.) and Lamaist hierarchs, which, as noted, are only "sometimes", "in some works"they are called respectively" black (i.e. secular. - M. G.) and yellow (i.e. spiritual. - M. G.) feudal lords " (p. 176, 180); average, which includes all categories of " subordinate, dependent aratstvo "(Khamjilga, Shabi and somon arats or albatu), "in legal and economic terms, those who were in difficult conditions" (p. 182) and the lowest (domestic servants and slaves). It is also evident in the section on the fiscal system that existed under the Qing (p. 192-201), in which the main place is occupied by a description of various state taxes, taxes and duties, while only one and a half pages are devoted to natural and labor levies in favor of local nobility (p. 200-201), and they are not used at all such generally accepted concepts in sociology as food, labor, money rent, sharecropping.

In general, in the entire volume there is no mention of serfdom, feudal exploitation (the exploitative nature is attributed only to Chinese commercial and usurious capital), anti-feudal movements, feudalism as such, which was discussed in abundance in all editions of the one-volume, as well as in the three-volume "History of the MNR". It seems that the authors carefully avoid this problem. As a result, the characteristics of the social system, social and political differentiation of the Mongolian society of the XVII-XIX centuries are left out of brackets, which methodologically somewhat impoverishes part II and the entire work as a whole.

3. All this is more than compensated for by the extraordinary factual richness, novelty, variety and richness of the historical information given in all chapters and paragraphs of the volume. Particularly impressive, for example, is the detailed history of the gradual penetration and establishment of the dominance of Chinese trade and usurious capital in Mongolia, showing the mechanism of Chinese trade and usurious operations, up to the message of some bio-sources.-

page 176

A broad picture of the revolts against Christian missionaries, and especially a series of sporadic and local armed popular uprisings against the Manchu administration, Chinese colonists, and local authorities in Inner Mongolia and Barga, is presented in such detail for the first time in chapter IV. And of course, chapter V, "Culture of the Mongols of the XVII - early XX centuries", is extremely informative, significantly expanding the ideas about the setting of secular and religious education in Mongolia in modern times, about folk knowledge, artistic and historical literature, art and architecture of this period.

Separately, I would like to mention the final chapter of the reviewed volume, which is unusual for all previous general "Histories of the MPR" and very informative. It meticulously traces the long process of forming and arranging the borders of modern Mongolia, starting with the formation of their foundations in the XVII century. and the final definition of the triple Russian-Chinese-Mongolian Kyakhta agreement in 1915. Moreover, it follows from the text that in the south and in the east the border line was formed as a result of the transformation of natural geographical boundaries between the Northern (Khalkha) and Southern (Inner)Qins Mongolia to the state border of Mongolia with China. According to the authors, the formation of the northern and especially western borders and their arrangement in accordance with the series of Russian-Chinese treaties of the late XVII - early XX centuries were directly influenced by the aggressive policy of Qing China and the territorial expansion of tsarist Russia in Siberia, which met stubborn resistance of the Mongols in the XVII century (pp. 334-335). and then expansion in Central Asia, one of the manifestations of which was allegedly the expedition of Lieutenant Colonel I. Buchholz to the Yamyshev Lake area in 1715. that is, to the territory under the control of the Oirats, who ousted the Russians from this salt mine in 1717 (p. 330).

It seems that a certain anti-Russian touch of certain provisions in this chapter is a tribute to the political conjuncture of the 1990s, because they do not correlate with historical facts. Without going into the discussion, I will only note that the development of "newly profitable" lands in Siberia and the Far East, despite all the disputes and clashes with the Mongols that were inevitable in those conditions, did not pursue the goal of seizing the desired Mongol possessions, and that the natural expansion of the borders of the Russian Empire in the XVIII-XIX centuries did not affect the interests of Mongolia with Qing China, that the adventure with the Buchholz expedition was undertaken by Peter I only in order to search for gold, which was necessary for waging the Northern War, and, finally, that it was Russia's position in 1911-1915 that helped defend the territorial integrity of the indigenous Mongolian Khalkha ulus [Materials on History..., 1959-2000; International relations... , 1989].

Speaking about the factual content of the volume, it is necessary to note an impressive introductory review of sources and literature on the modern history of Mongolia, which includes relevant chronicles, archival documentary materials in Mongolian, Manchu, Chinese, and Tibetan, including rare, poorly used and still little-known handwritten works from the archives of not only Mongolia, but also from the archives of other countries. and the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region of China and Taiwan (p. 25-26), as well as the works of all generations of Mongolian, Russian, Western European, Chinese and Japanese authors on this period of Mongolian history.

I think that the review would be even more exhaustive if it included publications by S. D. Dylykov of the Code of Manchu laws for the Mongols " Tsaajin bichig "(Moscow, 1998), B. Shirendib's fundamental work "Mongolia at the Turn of the XIX-XX centuries" (Ulaanbaatar, 1965), I. Ya. Zlatkin's monographs "Essays on the new and recent History of Mongolia "(Moscow, 1957) and Sh. B. Chimitdorzhiev "Russia and Mongolia" (Moscow, 1987), works by Ch. Bowden's Modern History of Mongolia (L., 1964).

These wishes do not detract from the great work of the authors, who managed to adequately present the richness of the source and historiographic base on which the research of the new history of Mongolia is based. In general, the wide use and introduction of many documentary materials into scientific circulation, deep penetration into the subject of research is another advantage of this collective work. It is undoubtedly a new significant contribution to the study of the original history of Mongolia. The author's team managed to show that under the difficult conditions of foreign domination, the country and people preserved their national identity, way of life, and culture, and by entering the system of world economic relations, they created the prerequisites-

page 177

We need to revive our statehood and enter the era of fundamental changes - the XX century.

list of literature

Golman M. I. Russkie archivnye materialy ob otnosheniyakh Galdan Boshoktu khan s Rossiiskom gosudarstvo [Russian archival materials on relations between Galdan Boshoktu Khan and the Russian state]. Altaica.I. M., 1997.

History of the Dzungarian Khanate (1635-1758). Moscow, 1983.

Ishzhamts N. Mongol ard Tumny 1755-1758 ony tusgar togtnoli toloo zevsegt temtsel (Armed struggle of the Mongolian people for independence in 1755-1758). Ulaanbaatar, 1962.

Materials on the history of Russian-Mongolian relations 1607-1699. Moscow, 1959-2000.

International relations in Central Asia of the 17th-18th centuries. Documents and materials. Book 1. Moscow, 1989.

Permanent link to this publication: