At the beginning of the 20th century, the foundation of classical Oriental literary studies was laid in Russia. A galaxy of scientists is being formed who are creating their own scientific schools: V. V. Barthold, N. Ya. Marr, B. Ya. Vladimirtsov, S. F. Oldenburg, I. A. Orbeli, F. I. Shcherbatskoy, I. Yu. Krachkovsksh, V. M. Alekseev, A. P. Barannikov, E. E. Bertels, V. V. Struve, V. A. Gordlevsky, N. A. Shishkin, V. A. Shishkin, V. A. Shishkin, V. A. Shishkin, V. A. Shishkin, V. A. Shishkin, V. A. Shishkin, V. A. Shishkin,. I. Konrad. Their works are characterized by thoroughness, high professionalism, universalism, as well as thoroughness, integrity, sound analysis of the actual material under study, and most importantly - they contain impulses for further research.

Keywords: Mongolian studies, medieval Mongolian literature, historical poetics, analysis of fiction.

Mongolian studies are most successful in the traditional centers of Oriental studies-Moscow and Leningrad. At the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Academy of Sciences and its Leningrad branch, at the Faculty of Oriental Studies of Leningrad State University, at the Institute of World Literature, there are scientists engaged in the study of the literature of the Mongolian peoples. Mongolian studies are also being developed in research centers and universities in Buryatia and Kalmykia.

Undoubtedly, the St. Petersburg School of Oriental Studies has made a significant contribution to Oriental studies. It was its representatives who laid the foundations of classical Oriental studies in Russia. The beginning of the XX century can be noted as the heyday of St. Petersburg Mongolian studies, associated with the names of A.M. Pozdneev, V. L. Kotvich, A.D. Rudnev, B. Ya. Vladimirtsov, N. N. Poppe, B. Baradin. N. N. Poppe, C. J. Zhamtsarano, V. A. Kazakevich, S. A. Kozin, G. N. Rumyantsev, S. D. Dylykov, B. I. Pankratov, and L. S. Puchkovsky worked fruitfully in the Mongolian Office of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Boris Yakovlevich Vladimirtsov (1884-1931), a prominent Mongolian scholar, belongs to this remarkable category of scientists. He can rightly be called the founder of literary studies and folklore studies of the Mongolian peoples as a science. His fundamental research, publications of literary and folklore texts, as well as translations contributed to the formation and development of Mongolian literary studies. In his works devoted to the literature of the common Mongolian period, B. Y. Vladimirtsov not only paid attention to the study of the most important problems of literary history, but also outlined the prospects for their further study.

B. Y. Vladimirtsov underwent fundamental training, both theoretical and practical, which was characterized by breadth and systematic character. While still a student, he took part in expedition work, and in 1925 he led an ethnological and linguistic expedition to the Khentei and Urginsky aimags of Mongolia, and in 1926-an expedition of the USSR Academy of Sciences to Mongolia and China. He didn't just study theory.

page 89
at the University of St. Petersburg, but also at the College de France, at the Sorbonne. In 1912-1913 he worked in libraries and museums in Paris and London. Vladimirtsov belonged to that generation of Orientalists who, due to the lack of research in their science, had to work in several directions, without being confined to any narrow specialty.

In his works devoted to Mongolian literature and folklore, Vladimirtsov managed to raise issues that are relevant for literary studies: the relationship between folklore and literature, the interpenetrability of these two aesthetic systems, traditions and innovations, the periodization of Mongolian literature, the evolution and functioning of the genre system, the specifics of Mongolian literature, determining its place in the literary process of the Indo-Tibetan area, the influence of Buddhism on literature, translation and literary relations. The merit of Vladimirtsov is that he showed the ways of transition from textual and philological research to the analysis of literary material, the ability to generalize them.

Among literary studies, the article "Mongolian Literature" (1920) stands out for its fundamental nature, where for the first time in the history of Mongolian literature, the author tried to summarize all the material available at that time and consider the evolution of Mongolian literature, and in an indissoluble connection with historical changes in Mongolian society. Following A. M. Pozdneev, Vladimirtsov raises the question of "the low popularity of Mongolian literature", "the attitude of the Mongols to their writing, literature", moreover, it is with these questions that he begins the article, noting that for forty years Mongolian literature has not been seriously studied. He sees the reason for this, firstly, in the fact that the Mongolian peoples are historically "scattered over a vast area from the Don to the Great Ocean, from the Lena River to the Tibetan capital, having become part of several state organizations" (Vladimirtsov, 2003, p.59). Secondly, Vladimirtsov points out a circumstance that influenced the entire spiritual life and culture of the Mongolian peoples - the adoption of Buddhism, thanks to which they were involved in the Indo-Tibetan cultural world. In this case, the researcher is concerned with questions that can be defined as key: does Mongolian literature exist, can works of Mongolian writing be recognized as literary? Reflecting on these problems that were relevant for the development of Mongolian studies at that time, Vladimirtsov writes that "an attentive observer will discover a curious world, discover a special literature, and it is literature, and not the written language of a nomadic people, which develops in very special conditions, unfamiliar to the cultural peoples of Europe and Asia" [Vladimirtsov, 2003, p.60].

Highly appreciating the "Hidden Legend of the Mongols" (1240) from the point of view of fiction, Vladimirtsov stressed that this is "a real literary work, and moreover the most interesting, the most vivid, with which no creation of subsequent Mongolian literature can compare" [Vladimirtsov, 2003, pp. 60-61], since none of the works of the following Mongolian literature can be compared. the nomadic people did not leave such a monument, which "so figuratively and in detail depicts the true life" [Vladimirtsov, 1934, pp. 8-9]. Of course, his assumption is extremely important that " perhaps in the era of the flourishing of the Mongol people, the greater rise of its national forces, the creation of a powerful, iron and organized empire and the extensive conquests of the richest countries of the East, the Mongols created something else, perhaps they also had other literary works well-known skills and directions were determined . .."[Vladimirtsov, 2003, p. 61].

It should be noted that Vladimirtsov took an essentially serious step, following O. M. Kovalevsky, in developing the problem of periodization of the history of Mongolian literature.

The first period is called epic by him and coincides with the time of the appearance and existence of the Great Mongol Empire (XII-XIV centuries). The author considers historical legends, heroic and didactic texts to be the epic genre of Mongolian literature.-

page 90
He also writes about the existence of a certain literary trend, "which managed to be brilliantly revealed in literary works" [Vladimirtsov, 2003, p.62]. The scientist's statement that the literary traditions laid down in the XIII-XIV centuries continued to develop throughout all subsequent periods, not only in literary works themselves, but also in didactic, as well as in historical works and chronicles, is absolutely true. It is also significant that it was during this period that the Mongolian literary language was developed and developed, its vocabulary was enriched, and even the grammar of the Mongolian literary language was scientifically studied.

The second period, following historians, Vladimirtsov calls the "dark" (XV-XVI centuries) and, in his opinion, at this time all literary activity stops, because this period is closely connected with the fall of the Mongol dynasty in China.

The third period (from the 17th century to the revolution) is designated by him as Buddhist, because it is associated with the spread of Tibetan Buddhism and Manchu rule. The end of the 16th century is associated with the strengthening of the Mongol khanates and tribal alliances, and, as a result, the revival of Mongolian society begins, causing new spiritual needs. By the second half of the 17th century, almost all Mongol tribes had adopted Tibetan Buddhism, and Tibet was becoming a promised land for them, a source of spiritual light: Mongolian writing was being revived with renewed vigor, and literary and translation activities were being actively resumed. According to B. Y. Vladimirtsov, it was during this period that the distinctive national character of Mongolian literature was formed, distinguishing it from other literatures of nomadic peoples and other Buddhist literatures.

Mongol literature is of "special, special interest", also because, according to B. Ya. Vladimirtsov, "the Mongolian folk soul, its aspirations, ideals and tastes are revealed not only in certain original literary works, but also in the selection of translations, translation into their native language, assimilation and assimilation of borrowed material." Another reason is that " the Mongols got from Tibet and China a number of monuments of world literature, a number of literary works that in other forms, in other editions and versions became widely known in many countries of the West and East. Later, Mongolian literature preserved several monuments of Indian literature, which in India itself either disappeared completely or were preserved in a completely different form, which is why the Mongolian versions are extremely important for restoring the original features" [Vladimirtsov, 2003, pp. 66-67].

A further review of specific works of Mongolian literature of the "Buddhist period", translated literature of Indian, Tibetan and Chinese origin and, in this connection, the formulation of problems of literary connections and influences, problems of relations between folklore and literature, as well as an analysis of the literary process by him, make it possible to point out the emergence of Kalmyk (c. XVII century) and Buryat (late XVIII V.) literatures, which in general can be considered as a convincing proof by Vladimirtsov that medieval Mongolian literature had all the features of national literature, which has its own specifics and originality. "The fundamental works of B. Ya. Vladimirtsov," writes N. N. Poppe, "evoked a lively response from other researchers, encouraging them to deal with a number of problems put forward in them" (Poppe, 1937, p. 1298).

Since August 1931, when B. Y. Vladimirtsov suddenly passed away at the age of 47, Nikolai Nikolaevich (later - Nicholas)became the head of Soviet Mongolian studies Poppe (1897-1991)1. After his teacher, he became head of the Mongolian Office of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences, in which

1 About the controversial fate of a scientist, who for many years was preferred to remain silent even in the special scientific literature, - the largest Mongolian scholar, corresponding member. of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Nikolai Nikolaevich Poppe, and later-Professor of the American University of Washington in Seattle, Nicholas Poppe, see: Alpatov V. M. Nikolai-Nicholas Poppe. lit-ra, 1996.

page 91
Specialists in the main areas of Mongolian studies worked: Ts. Zh. Zhamtsarano, S. A. Kozin, G. N. Rumyantsev, V. A. Kazakevich, G. D. Sanzheev, S. D. Dylykov and others. Then, in 1932, he replaced Vladimirtsov at the Academy of Sciences, where he was elected the youngest corresponding member at the age of 35. In 1933, the Association of Mongolian Studies was established, headed by N. N. Poppe, which included leading employees of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Language and Thought of the USSR Academy of Sciences, the Leningrad Yenukidze Oriental Institute and the Leningrad Institute of Philosophy, History and Linguistics. One of the tasks of the Association's research activities was to study the literature of the Mongolian peoples. N. N. Poppe devotes two articles to the study of Buryat-Mongolian literature: the first was published in 1930 in the "Literary Encyclopedia" [Poppe, 1930], the second is a fundamental, large - scale article devoted to the study of problems of Buryat-Mongolian literary studies [Poppe, 1934, pp. 13-37]. These and other works on folklore studies, shamanism, and linguistics were the result and generalization of the material collected by him in scientific expeditions to Buryatia and Mongolia from 1926 to 1932.

Considering the work of N. N. Poppe in the field of literary studies, I should pay attention to his significant contribution to the development of the methodology of historical and literary research of the literatures of the Mongolian peoples. In the articles "Problems of Buryat-Mongolian literary studies", "Results of the study of the Mongolian language and Mongolian literature in the USSR for 20 years", " Current state of the study of Mongolian literature abroad "[Poppe, 1937, pp. 1281-1301(1); Poppe, 1937, pp. 185-202 (2)]. He continued the scientific foundations of Mongolian literary studies laid by Vladimirtsov. Analyzing the formation and development of Mongolian studies as a science, he emphasized its pronounced "linguistic bias" and considered the study of Mongolian literature to be the most backward, the reason for which he saw in the lack of preparation of the ground for research. In this connection, he stated that "to date, we do not have a single literary study in the exact sense of the word, because what little we have is partly philological works, critical editions of texts with translations and philological commentaries, and partly general reviews of certain types of literary works" (Poppe, 1934, p. 13].

N. N. Poppe, in his article "Problems of Buryat-Mongolian Literary studies", highlights the problem of relations between translated and original literature among the most urgent problems of Mongolian literary studies. In his opinion, most translations of literary works into Mongolian are not just translations, but reworkings, a kind of special versions, causing local literary phenomena in the new environment, national responses and influencing national literature. Poppe paid serious attention to the study of shamanic poetry. In particular, he was able to show its inseparable connection with epic literature, for the first time raise questions about the influence of Buddhism, especially elements of Tantrism2 on shamanic literature, as well as identify genre varieties of shamanic poetry and problems, as he writes, of book works of shamanic literature. As a characteristic feature of Mongolian literature, Poppe notes its indissoluble connection with oral folk art, as well as the influence of literary works on oral creativity. In particular, using a concrete example, he showed the ways of penetration of the author's text into folklore and its further fate.

Poppe's reference to two serious shortcomings in his research on the literature of the Mongolian peoples deserves special attention. In fact, he was the first to raise the question of a general theoretical nature, very relevant for that time - what is the subject of literary studies. Reflecting on this,

2 Tantrism is one of the central directions of the philosophical concept of Buddhism in its Tibetan interpretation.

page 92
he comes to the conclusion that " the first defect of the previous literary attempts of the Mongolists (as N. Poppe himself rightly notes, except for B. Ya. Vladimirtsov. It consists in not distinguishing between the history of literature and the history of writing, in substituting literature for writing in the broadest sense of the word, and in not understanding the tasks of literary studies as a science that has only artistic works as its object "(Poppe, 1934, p. 14). His remark that the object of literary criticism should be only works of art, fiction in general, which is now perceived as an axiom, was of fundamental importance for that period of development of literary criticism of the Mongolian peoples. The second shortcoming Poppe formulated as "the desire to consider the literature of all Mongolian peoples as a single literature, as one literature" [Poppe, 1934, p. 14]. Indeed, Russian Mongolian scholars, as well as foreign ones, did not distinguish between literary works created by Mongols living in Inner Mongolia (China), as well as Khalkha-Mongols (Mongolia), Buryats or Kalmyks (Russia) until the 1930s. The totality of the works of all these nationalities was considered as Mongolian literature.

Rereading Poppe's article today, one involuntarily begins to reflect on the ways of developing the literature of the Mongolian peoples and, naturally, questions arise to which it is difficult to give unambiguous answers. The problems that have been identified to one degree or another in N. N. Poppe's article are relevant and require understanding today : what is the artistic specificity, national identity of each of the Mongolian literatures, what is the difference between one period of literature and another, etc. it is necessary, of course, to study the movement of literature at every stage of its development, starting from its origins, and to determine its national identity. Of course, in this case, it is crucial to rely on the movement of literature in time and on the features of those changes that occur in its being. That is, the diachronic aspect of the study is put forward, which makes it possible to distinguish such a history of literature from its synchronous section, which studies literature as a state devoid of changes in time. However, these two aspects are interrelated and their influence on each other is fruitful. A truly synchronous slice implicitly contains traces of evolutionary development, and the value of the diachronic aspect is determined by the completeness of each reference point of the synchronous slice. Summing up what N. N. Poppe has done in the field of studying the literature of the Mongolian peoples, we note that in all the above-mentioned works of the scientist, a broad overview and analysis of medieval Mongolian literature of the turn of the XIX-XX centuries is given. The literature of the Buryat-Mongols of the Soviet period up to the Great Patriotic War is studied and analyzed, and the problems of its further research are outlined.

Tsyben Zhamsaranovich Zhamtsarano (1880-1942), a remarkable son of the Buryat people, made an invaluable contribution to the formation and development of Mongolian studies in Russia and Mongolia. He is known not only as a scholar of philology, collector of unique manuscripts and museum collections, translator of masterpieces of world classical literature, but also as an organizer of science, a public figure. N. N. Poppe, who worked together with C. J. Zhamtsarano, highly regarded him as a "doctor of literary studies" and considered him "one of the most famous Mongolists" of his time. Zhamtsarano's outstanding personality and thirst for knowledge are evidenced by the fact that, as a student at St. Petersburg University, in 1902-1907, he studied as a free student at the law, Physics and Mathematics, history and Philology faculties, as well as at the Faculty of Oriental Languages, which allowed him to get truly universal and at the same time highly qualified students. at the same time, solid and deep knowledge. He immediately and easily entered the circle of St. Petersburg Orientalists [Reshetov, 1998, pp. 5, 8-9].

Since 1903, he actively began to engage in research work, to collect material, he annually went on an expedition to Buryatia and Mongolia until 1912.

page 93
The Imperial Academy of Sciences, the Russian Committee for the Study of Central and Eastern Asia, the Ethnographic Department of the Russian Museum, the Asian Museum, the Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography. Peter the Great, where various materials collected by him are still stored. In 1905, while still a student, he was awarded the silver medal of the Russian Geographical Society. Everything collected by Zhamtsarano caused and still causes surprise and admiration of specialists then and today, it seems incredible that it was collected, recorded and processed by one person. The texts represent different genres in more than ten Mongolian languages and dialects. The range of materials presented by him is wide: workbooks, diaries, articles, notes, texts on folklore, shamanism, Buddhism, various cults, including Genghis Khan, written literature, etc. - all this carefully preserved in the archives, manuscript departments and libraries of St. Petersburg, of course, is an invaluable scientific asset, still little introduced into scientific circulation. Nevertheless, the main merit of Ts. Zhamtsarano was the discovery of a rich Buryat heroic epic for the scientific world, and not only "Geser"*.

Undoubtedly, the work done by a scientist can be assessed as a scientific feat, because it is incredibly difficult, painful and even unsafe to collect and write down thousands of lines of more than a dozen epic works, and even more so, shamanic poetic texts. First, when writing, for example, shamanic texts, it is necessary to earn the full trust of a poetically minded shaman, since during the recitation of the text there is no opportunity to refer to him, clarify or ask again. Secondly, the recording person could cause distrust not only of the shaman himself, but also of those people who came to perform the rite, because not only the texts, but also the whole action is sacred (in his" Diary " he noted that such a person could even be beaten). Ts. Zhamtsarano wrote down in a cursive Old Mongolian letter, and then copied it in Cyrillic. The well-known Russian Mongol scholar A. Rudnev, highly appreciating the contribution of the scientist, wrote the following on one of the folders of the Ts. Zhamtsarano foundation:: "The Buryat scholar managed to collect such an amazing amount of texts, which no other collector, it seems, has collected, nor from any other people..." Kozmin put it this way: "Before the eyes of European scientists, a colossal work of poetic creativity and pictures of centuries-old thoughts on the national past and national destinies was revealed "(cit. by: [Reshetov, 1998, p. 12]).

In 1936, Zhamtsarano published a major work "Mongolian Chronicles of the XVII century" - the first study that marked the beginning of the scientific study of chronicles by Mongol scholars, in which artistic texts of various genres of Mongolian medieval literature occupy a large place. This work is the first attempt to study the genesis and evolution of the Mongolian chronicle as a literary genre. All Zhamtsarano's research work, his intense research on collecting folklore and written monuments, and their publications were aimed at preserving and transmitting that important national and cultural "code", the loss of which carried the inevitable danger of cultural impoverishment, which he expressed more than once in one form or another [see: Zhamtsarano, 1918, pp. 11-34].

It is noteworthy that chronicles and historical chronicles were written in the classical literary Old Mongolian language, which is understandable for all Mongolian peoples (this is a kind of "supranational" language, which has a "universalist" character, which is related to Latin), during the periods of political and spiritual rise of the Mongols - in the era of Genghis Khan and his successors (XIII-XIV centuries) and in the age of Legden Khan of Chakhar (XVI-XVII centuries). It is known that the Mongolian literary tradition begins with the "Secret Legend of the Mongols" - a fundamental historical and literary monument of the early Middle Ages, which absorbed the traditions of an older period.

* Or "Gesar". Both spellings are found.

page 94
Then there is the so - called "dark period" (late 14th-early 16th centuries) of Mongolian history, during which not a single written monument has been discovered. "All those chronicles are missing," Ts. Zhamtsarano - which were used by Rashid al-Din, there are also no traces of the Mongolian chronicles used by the Khiva historian of the XVII century. Abul Ghazi. It is difficult to assume that no historical works were written in Mongolian during this period. Probably, in different places, different persons kept records of events that took place in the XIV-XVI centuries in Mongolia itself. These records formed the basis of the stories of the above-mentioned chronicles of the XVII century " (Zhamtsarano, 1936, p. 9).

C. Zhamtsarano believes that only since the second half of the sixteenth century, due to the penetration of Buddhism from Tibet, or rather, with the resumption of close relations with Tibet, which were interrupted with the fall of the Yuan Dynasty, 3 and the struggle for political and cultural independence, among the Mongols gradually showed interest in books and literary pursuits. Moreover, the XVI-XVII centuries. he defines it as the Renaissance period, during which "huge literature" was created, and he calls this time "the era of great literary works" (Zhamtsarano, 1936, p.10).

It seems that it is no accident that Zhamtsarano, analyzing these two centuries of Mongolian history and culture, recalls the Renaissance, because to some extent the theory put forward by A. N. Veselovsky begins to work on Mongolian soil: if the Renaissance was born out of a dialogue between the national culture and some other culture that is close to the national and at the same time alien, embedded in the national Since then, the fate of Mongolian culture has been closely linked with Tibetan (and through it with Indian); not only translations appear, but also the Tibetan language is actively used by Mongolian authors, exerting a fertilizing significance on the entire subsequent culture of the Mongolian world.

Zhamtsarano attempted a comparative analysis and comparison of four Mongolian chronicles of the 17th century: the" Golden Legend " (Altan tonbči) by an unknown author (1627) and Lubsan Danzan (1655), the "Precious Legend" (Erdeni-yin tobči, 1662) by Sagan-Setsen, and the "Yellow History" (Sira tuyuji, ser. XVII century) by an unknown author and, as he writes, "adding to them one work of the XIII century, namely the White History." Zhamtsarano was one of the first to determine that the text of the "Golden Legend" of Lubsan Danzan consists of two-thirds of the "Hidden Legend of the Mongols" and other chronicles of the time of Genghis Khan. This appeal to the cultural values of the past can be considered, on the one hand, as evidence of putting an end to the" dark age " that undoubtedly threatened national identity. On the other hand, it is an attempt to revive and continue the traditions of the "golden age" and a kind of dialogue with its origins. Here we can talk about a certain method, close to what D. S. Likhachev called "uncivilized imitation". This method is caused by a certain historical necessity, which required the restoration of lost connections with the creations of the heyday of Mongolian culture.

Thus, in the work of Ts. Zhamtsarano, we can distinguish two major stages-preserving the oral and poetic heritage, on the one hand, and on the other - the book heritage of the Mongolian peoples, and establishing the integrity of Mongolian medieval literature, studying the chronicles in its historical evolution-which corresponded to the level of development of Mongolian studies at the beginning of the XX century. it was not possible to avoid the tragic realities of its time. In August 1937, he was arrested on charges of organizing counter-revolutionary espionage and sabotage activities in favor of Japan and sentenced to five years in prison-

3 The Mongol Yuan Empire in China lasted from 1271 to 1368. In fact, the Mongols ruled in China for more than one hundred and thirty years, counting from the overthrow of the Jin Dynasty to the fall of the Yuan Empire in 1368.

page 95
He served a long term of imprisonment, first in the Orel prison, and with the beginning of the Great Patriotic War in the Sol-Iletsk prison of the Orenburg region, where his life ended at the age of 62 in April 1942. He was rehabilitated in December 1956.

Sergei Andreevich Kozin (1879-1956), a brilliant scholar of the Mongolian languages, their history, culture, folklore, and literature, holds a special place among the early 20th - century Mongolian scholars.

S. A. Kozin's fundamental works on the study of major heroic epics of the Mongolian peoples, such as the Geseriad (1935), the Jangariad (1940), and the Epic of the Mongolian Peoples (1948), are published in academic publications one after another. In fact, Kozin first initiated the scientific study of the epic of the Mongolian peoples. He did a lot of painstaking work on textual analysis, translation, and scientific commentary of these monuments. For example, studying the Geseriad, published in Old Mongolian script in Beijing in 1716, he revised the opinion that existed in Mongolian studies (B. Laufer, B. Ya. Vladimirtsov) that the literary versions of the Geseriad originated on a Tibetan basis; he proved that this heroic epic is " indigenous, not translated Mongolian a work, and moreover a work of literary epic " [Kozin, 1935, p. 12]. Many of the scientist's propositions were the impetus for further research, the foundation on which philological science in the field of Mongolian studies is still based.

The publication of S. A. Kozin's "The Hidden Legend of the Mongols" (Mongol niguchatobchiyan) in 1941 was a real event in world Mongolian studies, a triumph of the scientist himself. Kozin included in the text a transliteration of the monument's Sino-Mongolian script, parallel texts from the "Golden Legend" (Altan tobči nova), a transcription of the Sino-Mongolian script that he translated into Uyghur-Mongolian in the form in which they could have been in the original, transmitted by signs of academic Latinized transcription. I also attached dictionaries first in the order of paragraphs of the text, then in the order of the Old Mongolian alphabet. In the Introduction, in addition to the general characteristics, he described in detail the ways of re-transcribing "Yuan Chao bi shi" 4, written in the Mongolian script of the Chinese system into the Uyghur-Mongolian writing system; proved that this is a monument of Mongolian fiction and conducted a comparative analysis with the later works of the Mongolian epic.

The publication of the full text, its translation, and scientific research of the "Hidden Legend of the Mongols" are the fruit of S. A. Kozin's hard work for fifteen years and evidence of the uniqueness and pricelessness of his work. In the Introduction, defining the main goal of the work, he specified:"...My interests in relation to the monument lie mainly in the field of purely literary studies" [Kozin, 1941, p. 11] and, examining the monument, I came to the conclusion that this work is literary, in particular, he wrote: "Already from the review of the monument from this purely technical point of view, it is necessary to conclude that the authors or the author attached to it, first of all, literary significance" [Kozin, 1941, p. 34]. Further, he noted that this work is "a universal syncretistic work of Mongolian literature, including many different elements: documentary-historical and epic, elements of literary lyrics, novellas, and even the beginnings of drama and tragedy" (Kozin, 1941, p.46).

Indeed, today there is no doubt that the artistic and aesthetic canon of literature of the general Mongolian period was formed in the most complete and complete form in the Middle Ages, playing a key role in the history of the Mongolian civilization. It was in the era of early feudalism, characterized by a complex

4 " Yuan chao bi shi "is the Chinese name for the"Secret Legend of the Mongols". Sometimes this name is used for the original Mongolian text written in Chinese characters, since the "Secret Legend of the Mongols" in the original language has not yet been found.

page 96
with the political situation and characterized by the so - called passionarity (L. N. Gumilev), literary literature gave its best example under the title "The Hidden Legend of the Mongols"-a fundamental historical and literary monument of the Middle Ages, which absorbed the traditions of an older period and testifies to the emergence and affirmation of poetic traditions and the addition of certain poetological concepts. A distinctive feature of the work is the combination of historical and artistic, prose and poetic, documentary and fictional, real and mythological, which left an imprint of originality and uniqueness on the entire work. The main thing in this work is that it represents artistic creativity that is not affected by the influence of either Buddhism or other ideological systems and foreign literary traditions.

Nina Pavlovna Shastina (1898-1980) was a great scholar of the Mongolian chronicles. Of the four famous Mongolian chronicles of the 17th century, N. P. Shastina studied and published two chronicles in the original language with their translation into Russian and with a good scientific apparatus. These are the" Yellow Story "(Sira tuyuji, ser. XVII century) by an unknown author and the" Golden Legend " (Altan tobči, 1655) by Lubsan Danzan. In addition, she introduced into scientific circulation another, fifth, chronicle of the XVII century called "History called the Savior" (Asarayči neretü-yin teüke, 1677) by Shamba Erhe Daicin. In all three chronicles studied, Shastina drew attention to the variety of genres of medieval Mongolian poetry. So, in the" Golden Legend " she conducted a comparative analysis of the poetic genres included in the chronicle, with the works available in the "Hidden Legend of the Mongols". Moreover, an attempt is made to analyze some examples of medieval poetry in literary studies. Analyzing the introduction and colophon to the chronicle "The Story called the Savior", written in verse, Shastina calls its author, Shamba Erhe Daichin, a poet.

N. P. Shastina has written two articles that analyze the works of medieval Mongolian literature: "The Image of Genghis Khan in the medieval literature of the Mongols "and"The Story of an orphan boy's dispute with the Nine knights of Genghis". Considering the literature of the common Mongolian period of the XIII-XVII centuries, he identifies two stages in their development. To the first, she refers works of the XIII-XIV centuries that reflect the life and work of Genghis Khan: "The Hidden Legend of the Mongols "(Shastina adheres to the direct translation of the monument and translates it as "The Secret History of the Mongols"), "The Legend of Argasun-Khurchi", "The Conversation of an orphan boy with nine knights of Genghis", "Meeting with three hundred warriors". taijiutami". To the second - all five annals of the XVII century. Analyzing the works of the first stage, Shastina notes the objectivity of the authors in covering the personality of Genghis Khan. On the one hand, they show him as a talented, intelligent and far-sighted statesman, on the other hand, they do not hide the shortcomings inherent in Genghis Khan, moreover, they openly write even about misdemeanors that border on a crime. Turning to the works of the second stage, the author focuses on the changes that occurred in the interpretation of the image of Genghis Khan. In particular, it comes to the conclusion that for the authors of the annals of the XVII century. It was important to show Genghis Khan as the unifier of all Mongol tribes, as the creator of the Great Mongol State. It is interesting to note that N. P. Shastina, who started working on the chronicles as a historian, gradually, following the internal laws of the genre, comes to literary research methods.

Georgy Ivanovich Mikhailov (1908 - 1986) devoted all his scientific creative activity to the literary work of the Mongolian peoples from ancient times to the XX century. Drawing on a wide range of factual material, G. I. Mikhailov in two monographic works - "The Literary Heritage of the Mongols" (1969), "Mongolian Literature" (co - authored with K. N. Yatskovskaya, who covered the modern period, 1969) - reviewed the entire centuries-old path of Mongolian literature, starting with oral folk art. These works were a major achievement of Mongolian studies in the second half of the XX century.

page 97
In fact, "The Literary Legacy of the Mongols" is the first serious scientific research work of a literary nature. Thanks to this particular work, literary Mongolian studies have made their full impact. For the first time in a single work, and of a monographic nature, the process of the origin, formation and development of medieval Mongolian literature was traced, starting from the oldest period to the first decades of the XX century. The section "Ancient Poetry" analyzes all the samples of ancient Mongol poetry known by that time. Further, exploring the "origin of literature", the formation and formation of the main literary types and genres is considered on the example of the analysis of specific works. A comparative analysis of works related to secular and spiritual literature, addressing the problems of literary interrelations and mutual influences, as well as identifying the main prerequisites for the emergence of realistic literature is noteworthy. G. I. Mikhailov wrote a number of articles that are distinguished by the thoroughness and depth of the problems under consideration, which remain important to this day. Among them: "The Hidden Legend" and " Altan Tobchi "(1962)," On the question of shamanism and shamanic poetry "(1969)," On the terms shastar, namtar, tuuzha and Sudar in Mongolian literature "(1970)," Myths in the historical works of the XIII-XIX centuries of the Mongolian peoples" (1983), " Myths in the heroic epic of the Mongolian peoples "(1984), etc.

Following B. Y. Vladimirtsov, G. I. Mikhailov contributed to the development of problems of periodization of the history of Mongolian literature. In his article "On the Periodization of the History of Mongolian Literature" (1968), making adjustments to Vladimirtsov's periodization, he notes that a literary critic, focusing on historical periodization, should not accept it unconditionally. Agreeing with the formulation of the first period, Mikhailov believes that the "dark" period, which may be legitimate in historical research, is unacceptable in relation to Mongolian literature, since in the XV-XVI centuries such significant works as "The Legend of Mandukhai Khatun", "Magtal to the six Mongolian tumens of Dayan Khan" appear in it. "The tale of the campaign of Ubashi khun-taizhi against the Oirats"," The Golden Book of Genghis Khan", as well as legends and legends that were included in the annals of subsequent centuries. Mikhailov further notes that the characterization of the period, called "Buddhist", suffers from one-sidedness, since, by highlighting translated works, it leaves in the shadow the works of truly Mongolian literature. In turn, Mikhailov suggests that the "epic period" should be preceded by a period of oral poetic creativity.

The periodization of G. I. Mikhailov, in our opinion, while having generally correct observations, still suffers from some incompleteness and vagueness of formulations and proofs. Within the limits of the article, of course, it is unrealistic to try to solve all the questions that arise in connection with the problem of periodization of medieval Mongolian literature. The main thing is to outline the possible contours of its solution. Nevertheless, I think it is important to take into account the real facts of the history of Mongolian literature of the medieval period and look at it once again as a complex, multi-stage evolutionary process. The objectivity of any established periodization system depends, as is well known, on the correct choice of criteria. Therefore, it is necessary to choose methodologically correct principles of approach to solving the problem. In this regard, the historicism of the approach will certainly guarantee correctness: the periodization of literature, which includes several major stages, should be based on facts that reflect the essence of the movement of its characteristic forms of literary consciousness. At the same time, the role and place of each of the stages in the overall process of historical development of national literature must be taken into account.

All of the above allows me to identify four main periods in the development of medieval Mongolian literature, which differ in a well-defined specificity of cultural historical consciousness and the style and genre forms it determines: the first period is "The literature of the formation and formation of Mongolian literature".

page 98
literature (XIII-XIV centuries)"; the second period - " Literature of the period of feudal fragmentation (XV-XVI centuries)"; the third period - " Literature of the period of the spread of Buddhism (late XVI - XVII centuries)"; the fourth period - " Literature of the period of the collapse of the Mongolian statehood and the formation of Kalmyk and Buryat nationalities (II half. XVII-XVIII centuries)".

Throughout the 20th century, the "traditional philological" direction in the study of medieval Mongolian literature was continued and dominated to a greater extent. The main research task facing Russian Mongolian scholars included the publication of sources on the literature of the medieval period with a translation into Russian and a scientific apparatus that includes commentary and notes. In addition to the above-mentioned Mongolian monuments, introduced into scientific circulation by the classics of Mongolian studies, we note the publications of L. S. Puchkovsky - "The Flow of the Ganges" by Gombodjab (1960), P. B. Baldanzhapov - "The Golden Legend" by Mergen gegen and A. G. Sazykin - "The History of Chojid-dagini" (1990). In total, Sazykin published more than thirty monuments of Mongolian literature with translations and commentaries, among them works of the genre of "walking" or travel notes, as well as a work dedicated to the Mongolian manuscript tradition.

In the second half of the 20th century, work continued on cataloging Mongolian manuscripts and woodcuts that had been started before the war. Part of the manuscript collection was described and published by L. S. Puchkovsky. A. G. Sazykin, who published three volumes of the catalog, did a great job of completing the description and cataloging of the collection of manuscripts and woodcuts. The study of archival materials on Mongol studies was carried out by I. I. Iorish, who published Materials on Mongols, Kalmyks and Buryats in the Archives of Leningrad(1966).

Questions of versification of the Mongolian peoples were considered in the works of A. M. Khamgashalov "Experience in the study of Buryat-Mongolian versification" (1940), G. O. Tudenov "Buryat Versification" (1958), which define the general rhythmic norms and laws of both folklore and literary versification systems. In L. K. Gerasimovich's monograph "Mongolian Versification" (1975), for the first time in Russian Mongolian studies, an experimental phonetic study of the system of Mongolian versification was conducted, with the help of which the evolution of Mongolian verse was traced.

A number of collective works, such as "Literary Relations of Mongolia" (1981), "The Book of Mongolia" (1988), and "Mongolian Literature: Essays on the history of the 13th - first half of the 20th century" (1997), are devoted to theoretical understanding of the most important topical problems of literary studies of the Mongolian peoples. They made a significant contribution to the study of medieval Mongolian literature in the light of general tendencies of the world literary process. Of course, a lot has been done, but the problem of understanding medieval Mongolian literature in its genetic, typological, etc. as well as the creation of an academic history of literature of the classical period, it remains relevant for literary studies of the XXI century.

list of literature

Vladimirtsov B. Ya. Public order of the Mongols. Mongolian Nomadic Feudalism, Moscow, 1934.
Vladimirtsov B. Ya. Mongolian literature // Vladimirtsov B. Ya. Works on the literature of the Mongolian peoples / Ed.: V. M. Alpatov et al., Moscow, 2003.

Gerasimovich L. K. Mongolian versification. Opyt eksperimental'no-foneticheskogo issledovaniya [Experience of experimental phonetic research].
Zhamtsarano Ts. Zh. Introduction. On collecting monuments of Mongolian folk literature // Samples of folk literature of Mongolian tribes. Texts. Vol. 1. Works of folk literature of Buryats / Collected by Ts. Zh. Zhamtsarano. Issue III. Epic works of ekhirit-bulagatov. Ha-Oshir hubun. In 2 editions. Pg., 1918.

Zhamtsarano Ts. Zh. Mongolian Chronicles of the XVII century (Proceedings of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences, vol. XVI). M.-L., 1936.

page 99
The Book of Mongolia. Bibliophile's Almanac. Issue XXIV. Moscow, 1988.

Kozin S. A. Geseriada. M.-L., 1935.

Kozin S. A. The hidden legend. Mongol chronicle of 1240 under the title Mongol-un nigyča tobčiyan. Yuan chao bi shi. Mongolian everyday Izbornik / Introduction to the study of the monument, transl., texts, glossaries by S. A. Kozin, Moscow-L., 1941.

Literary Relations of Mongolia, Moscow, 1981.
Mikhailov G. I. "The hidden legend" and "Altan tobchi" / / Materials on the history and philology of Central Asia. Ulan-Ude, 1962.

Mikhailov G. I. O periodizatsii istorii mongol'skoy literatury [On the periodization of the history of Mongolian literature].
Mikhailov G. I. Literary Heritage of the Mongols, Moscow, 1969.
Mikhailov G. I. K voprosu o shamanizme i shamanskoi poezii [On the question of shamanism and shamanic poetry]. Teoreticheskie problemy vostochnykh literatur [Theoretical Problems of Oriental Literature], Moscow, 1969.

Mikhailov, G. I., On the terms shastar, namtar, tuuzha, and sudar in Mongolian literature, Teoreticheskie problemy izucheniya literatur Dalnego Vostoka, Moscow, 1970.
Mikhailov G. I. Mifi v istoricheskikh sochineniyakh XIII-XIX vv. mongol'skikh narodov [Myths in historical works of the 13th-19th centuries of the Mongolian peoples].

Mikhailov G. I. Mifi v geroicheskom epose mongol'skikh narodov [Myths in the heroic epic of the Mongolian peoples]. No. 84 (Mongol Studies and Turkology), Moscow, 1984.
Mongolian Literature: Essays on the history of the XIII-per. pol. XX century / Comp. K. N. Yatskovskaya, Moscow, 1997.

Poppe N. N. Results of the study of the Mongolian language and Mongolian literature in the USSR for 20 years // Izvestiya AN SSSR. Department of Social Sciences, No. 5, Moscow-L., 1937.
Poppe N. N. Buryat literature / / Literary Encyclopedia, vol. I. M., 1930.

Poppe N. N. Problemy buryat-mongolskogo literaturovedeniya [Problems of Buryat-Mongolian Literary Studies].
Poppe N. N. Results of the study of the Mongolian language and Mongolian literature in the USSR for 20 years // Izvestiya AN SSSR. Department of Social Sciences, No. 5, Moscow-L., 1937.
Poppe N. N. Sovremennoe sostoyanie izucheniya mongol'skoy literatury za zarubezhom [Current state of studying Mongolian literature abroad]. Zapiski Instituta vostokovedeniya AN SSSR, vol. VII, Moscow-L., 1937.

Puchkovsky L. S. Mongolian, Buryat-Mongolian and Oirat manuscripts and woodcuts of the Institute of Oriental Studies, Moscow-L., 1957.
Reshetov A.M. Nauka i politika v sudbe Ts. Zh. Zhamtsarano [Science and Politics in the fate of Ts. Zh. Zhamtsarano]. Issue 2-3. Researchers of Central Asia in the Fate of Russia, St. Petersburg, 1998.
Sazykin A. G. Rukisnaya kniga v istorii kul'tury mongol'skikh narodov: Ocherki [Handwritten Book in the History of culture of the Mongolian peoples: Essays]. Book 2. Moscow, 1988.

Sazykin A. G. Catalog of Mongolian manuscripts and woodcuts of the IV Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Vol. 1. Moscow, 1988; Vol. 2. Moscow, 2001; Vol. Z. Moscow, 2004.

(Sazykin A. G.) The history of Chojid-dagini. Facsimile of the manuscript / Transliteration of the text, translated from Mong., research. and comment. Moscow, 1990.

A. Khamgashalov Experience in the study of Buryat-Mongolian versification. Ulan-Ude, 1940.

(Shastina N. P.) Shara tuji. Mongol Chronicle of the 17th century / Consolidated text, transl., introduction. and a note by N. P. Shastina. Moscow-L., 1957.

Shastina N. P. Mongol Chronicle of the 17th century / / Peoples of Asia and Africa. 1961. N 4.

Shastina N. P. Obraz Genghis khan v srednevekovoi literatury mongolov [The image of Genghis Khan in the medieval literature of the Mongols]. Tataro-Mongols in Asia and Europe, Moscow, 1970.
Shastina N. P. The tale of the orphan boy's dispute with the nine Knights of Chinggis / / Countries and Peoples of the East. Issue XI. Moscow, 1971.

(Shastina N. P.) Lubsan Danzan. Allan tobci ("The Golden Legend") / Translated from English, introduction, comment. and attached by N. P. Shastina, Moscow, 1973.

Yatskovskaya K. N. Mongol literature / / Izuchenie literatury Vostoka: Rossiya, XX vek [Studying the Literature of the East: Russia, XX century]. Moscow, 2002.

page 100

Permanent link to this publication: