November 30-December 1, 2012 at St. John's College The international conference " From Russian Orientalism to Soviet Iranian Studies. The Iranian-speaking World and its History: A View from Russia", organized by the Oxford Oriental Institute. The theme of the conference shows the great importance that foreign scientists attach to the contribution of Russian and Soviet researchers to Iranian studies. It was attended by representatives of the scientific world from Great Britain, Russia, Uzbekistan, Austria, the USA, and the Netherlands.

The goal of the organizers was to understand how the theory of Edward Said, the author of the famous book "Orientalism" (New York, 1978), who changed the meaning and gave a negative meaning to this word, fits Russian Oriental studies. Can this theory be applied to Soviet Oriental studies? In terms of its content, E. Said's work is topical for Western Europe and the USA. It deals with the contribution of Western, mainly Anglo-American and French, orientalism to the establishment of the colonial rule of the West over the Middle East and other regions of the "third world". He was completely unaware of the Russian texture, which is why in all editions of the book the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union are mentioned only briefly, mostly as an object of American or European politics, and sometimes as an image of the Other comparable to the orientalized East. None of the Russian and Soviet Orientalists appear in it. E. Said examines in detail the role of European fiction of the XVIII-XX centuries in the spread of Orientalist stereotypes, but only Leo Tolstoy is mentioned in passing from the Russian classics. Neither Lermontov nor early Pushkin, in whose works Oriental exoticism and the conquest of the Muslim East by the Russians occupied a large place, found a place in his book. Another important point is that Russia has never been a colonial power. All this means that orientalism is not relevant for Russia.

The conference was opened by the head of the Council of the Institute of Oriental Studies at the University of Oxford, E. Hersig, and the moderator of the first session "Russian Orientalists on Central Asia" was his colleague S. Cronin.

The report of O. M. Yastrebova, a researcher at the Russian National Library (St. Petersburg), "Reflections on an Orientalist: Alexander Kuhn, the Man and His Legacy", presented in collaboration with Arzu Azad, an Oxford researcher, contained a detailed study of the life and work of Alexander Ludvigovich Kuhn (1840-1888), a Russian orientalist of German-Armenian origin. The most important period of his life came during his service in Central Asia, where, on behalf of the Turkestan Governor-General, he collected manuscripts, archives and other materials, and also took part in military campaigns to Kitab from Shakhrisabz, Iskanderkul, Kokand and Khiva. The scientist sent a significant number of manuscripts to the Imperial Public Library in St. Petersburg. However, he worked with some of them until his death, and later they were transferred to the Asian Museum. Much attention was paid to his "Turkestan Album", a collection of photographs depicting representatives of various peoples who inhabited Central Asia, their customs and national costumes. The biography of A. Kuhn and his contribution to Russian Iranian studies are poorly researched, and the speakers were able to tell about his personality and contribution to Iranian studies based on the archive of A. Kuhn.

An interesting interpretation of the events of modern history based on the report "Soviet Oriental Studies in Central Asia Alexander Semenov and his vision of the Tajik national identity" was presented by a researcher at the Faculty of History of the University of Oxford Matthias Batis. He reminded the audience that the former Soviet national republics in Central Asia did not seek independence in the early 1990s, and many scholars from Central Asian countries do not agree that Russia's mission in Central Asia was colonialist in nature. Emphasizing that some aspects of the Soviet heritage are often rightly criticized by local elites, the speaker noted that being part of the Russian Empire, and later the Soviet Union, made a significant contribution to the development of the Soviet Union.

formation of national identity, statehood and development of local peoples ' culture. These processes were based on the works of Russian Orientalists, who studied the ethnic and cultural characteristics of various peoples that formed their national identity. The works of A. A. Semyonov (1873-1958) had a huge impact on political and scientific discussions about the national identity of the peoples of Central Asia and the powerful influence of Persian culture on Tajikistan.

U. Abdulrasulov (Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of Uzbekistan) in his report "Personal correspondence of the Soviet orientalist O. D. Chekhov (1912-1982)" focused on previously unexplored aspects of the scientific work of one of the most famous Soviet researchers of the history of Central Asia in the Middle Ages, the author of more than 80 publications in this field Olga Dmitrievna Chekhov. After analyzing her works " Documents on the history of agrarian relations in the Bukhara Khanate in the XVII-XIX centuries "(1954), "Samarkand documents of the XV-XVI centuries" (1974), the speaker noted that they made a significant contribution to the development of problems of feudalism, feudal, land and property relations in Central Asia. personal archive of O. D. Chekhov, namely her correspondence with prominent Soviet Iranists: A. N. Boldyrev, A. A. Semenov, M. S. Andreev, I. P. Petrushevsky, O. I. Smirnov, O. A. Sukharev, Z. M. Buniyatov. He identified the main scientific problems that concerned O. D. Chekhov, her position on the most controversial issues of the medieval history of Central Asia, and traced the dynamics of her assessments. The speaker also focused on how Soviet ideological attitudes influenced the development of Iranian science.

In the report "Pamir and its peoples in Russian and Soviet historiography" by S. Aksakapov (London), it was noted that Russian and Soviet orientalists have devoted a large number of works to the history of the Pamirs since 1895. - years of dividing the Pamir territory into spheres of influence between the Russian Empire and Great Britain. Moreover, during the Soviet period, these studies became more extensive, and a new branch of science "Pamir studies" appeared, which covered the study of the history, ethnography, languages, and culture of the Pamir peoples. After reviewing the works of A. A. Bobrinsky, A. E. Snesarev, M. S. Andreev, A. A. Semenov and L. F. Monogarov, the speaker emphasized the continuity in the research of Russian and Soviet scientists. However, in his opinion, the focus of Russian researchers was to describe the religious customs, languages and character traits of mountain peoples in comparison with the peoples inhabiting the flat part of Central Asia. Soviet scholars focused on cultural, social, and economic transformations during the Soviet period. The speaker gave many examples of successful transformation of "oppressed and backward residents of the Pamirs into free residents of the Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Region of Tajikistan". In general, he positively assessed the Soviet period of the history of the peoples of this part of the Pamirs.

On the second day of the conference, the session "From Russian Orientalism to Soviet Iranian Studies: Shaping the field of research" was held, which was opened by A. A. Khismatulin (IVR RAS), who made a report "The beginning of Iranian Studies in Russia".

The scientist stressed that Iranian studies is a relatively new discipline of scientific research for both Russia and Western Oriental studies. Separate departments of Asian and African languages in higher educational institutions of the USSR began to train specialists in Iran in the 1930s. Before that, the education system in the Russian Empire and in the Soviet Union provided for the training of students of a broader profile. They studied the entire Muslim East and were required to be proficient in three or four Eastern languages, such as Arabic, Persian, and one or two Turkic languages.

The foundation of Oriental studies in the Asiatic Museum, the largest scientific center founded in 1818, was laid by German scientists invited by the Imperial Academy of Sciences. This made it possible not only to use the academic ties and traditions already formed in European science, but also to have a common language with European scientists in the direct and figurative sense of the word, since the first magazine published by the Asian Museum since 1849, "Asian Notes", was published in French. The involvement of foreign Orientalists contributed to the organic integration of Russian scientists into the unified European scientific community, including them in the exchange of scientific ideas and achievements.

L. M. Ravandi-Fadai (IB RAS) presented two reports. The subject of the report "Changing the geography of Iranian studies" was the structure of territorial development of the Eastern Federal District-

kovedeniya v Rossii [Environmental Studies in Russia]. The speaker highlighted the first stage, which was closely connected with St. Petersburg, which had a rich scientific tradition, when Oriental studies were concentrated around the Asian Museum. L. M. Ravandi-Fadai noted the great role of the Faculty of Oriental Studies of St. Petersburg University, the Lazarev Institute in Moscow and the Asian Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in training diplomatic and practical workers. Speaking about the second stage of Iranian studies (after the revolution of 1917), she focused on the importance of Oriental studies centers in Moscow and St. Petersburg for the development of Oriental studies in the backward regions of Central Asia and Transcaucasia, where scientists from the two capitals first opened oriental faculties in universities, and later branches of the USSR Academy of Sciences. The speaker focused on the structure of Iranian studies in Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia.

The second report of L. M. Ravandi-Fadai was devoted to the role of the Communist University of Workers of the East (KUTV) in Soviet Iranian studies. She emphasized its role in training party cadres for the republics of the USSR and the countries of the East. L. M. Ravandi-Fadai's attention was drawn to the scientific work carried out in Kutva within the framework of the Research Association for the Study of National and Colonial Problems, and the importance of publications in the journal "Revolutionary East", the most important publication that developed the main trends in the development of Soviet Oriental studies in general and Iranian studies in particular. The role of KUTVa in the preparation and publication of alphabets, grammars, textbooks and terminological dictionaries for the languages of backward peoples who did not have a written language before the 1917 revolution was noted.

Dmitry Volkov (Manchester, UK) presented a paper entitled "Gap or Continuity: the Organizational Structure of Russian Oriental Studies before and after 1917". The scientist showed that Russian Oriental studies of the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries and early Soviet Oriental studies (before 1941) can be divided into four main areas: academic, military, diplomatic service and (in the case of tsarist Russia) missionary activity of the Russian Orthodox Church. and its relationship with state power, pointing out that there are significant disagreements in the scientific world on the issue of continuity between the Oriental schools of the tsarist and Soviet periods.

In addition to presenting a brief analysis of recent English - and Russian-language works mainly in the field of the history of Russian Oriental studies, and in particular Iranian studies, the speaker highlighted epistemological shifts and the continuation of discourses in research carried out after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and gave his vision of the problem of "gap or continuity" in the context of the relationship between government and science. Going beyond the simplified scheme of "American-European orientalism" by Edward Said, D. V. Volkov proposed a new analysis of Russian Oriental studies on the example of the consideration of Iranian studies in the late Russian Empire, the USSR and post-Soviet Russia through the concepts of the French philosopher and historian Michel Foucault (1926-1984) about the intricacy of knowledge-power relations, discourses in socio-social relations. The role of intellectuals in modern society is still relevant in Western historiography, but, unfortunately, almost devoid of proper attention in the domestic one.

In her report "The History of Soviet Iranian Studies", I. E. Fedorova (Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences) showed that the history of Soviet Iranian studies is closely connected with the history of Russia after 1917 - a history of contradictory and tragic events, where scientific achievements were combined with strict ideological dictates and suppression of creative thought.

The subject of the report was the main stages of the development of Iranian studies in Russia from 1917 to the 1980s, the directions of scientific research, their connection with the development of humanitarian studies in the USSR. I. E. Fedorova analyzed the struggle between two schools in Russian historical science: "classical" - historical and philological, and "modern" socio-economic, and its impact on Iranian studies. She noted that along with studying the Persian language, literary monuments, ancient and medieval history of Iran in the Soviet era, the subject of research was the country's economic problems, modern history, and social structure. This, in turn, enriched Soviet science. However, representatives of the new socialist Oriental studies in general and Iranian studies in particular studied the entire life of the Eastern countries from the point of view of the liberation struggle of the oppressed people against imperialism from the point of view of the prospects of the national liberation movement,

and socio-economic problems in the light of the possibility of implementing a socialist revolution.

The speaker focused on the role played by the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences (until 1991, the USSR Academy of Sciences) in the comprehensive study of Iran. At the request of the organizers, Irina Fedorova focused on the research conducted by Soviet Iranists during the Great Patriotic War, since this period is practically unknown to foreign historians. She emphasized that the Moscow and Leningrad scientists who were evacuated to the republics of Central Asia not only continued their scientific work, but also laid the foundation for scientific schools in these regions of the Soviet Union.

B. Fragner (Vienna) in his report "Soviet scientific traditions and their influence on the development of international research concerning the study of Persian diplomatic documents: treaties, firmans, archival correspondence" noted that for many generations orientalists in Europe have studied the diplomatic documents of the Ottoman Empire. However, until the 1920s, the history of Iranian diplomacy did not attract the attention of researchers. V. F. Minorsky, a European scholar of Russian origin, was the first to make a significant contribution to the study of this issue. His students are Frenchman Zh. Oben and German W. Hinz continued the research of V. F. Minorsky in Europe. B. Fragner stressed that on the basis of the works of these scientists, by the 1950s, a European school for the study of Persian diplomatic documents was formed in England, France and Germany, which had a significant impact on the study of broader issues of the history of Iran.

Analyzing the works of V. F. Minorsky, the speaker noted that they were based on the traditions of the Russian school of Oriental studies. V. F. Minorsky's teacher was V. V. Barthold, who together with his colleagues studied Iran in the USSR in the 1920s and 1930s. B. Fragner believes that before the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Soviet Iranian school in general and the study of Persian diplomatic documents in particular occupied a leading place among scientists in Europe.

The final part of the conference "Soviet Iranian Studies and Identification Policy" was moderated by A. Morisson, a well-known scholar and expert on Central Asia from the University of Liverpool (Great Britain). D. Pickett's report (Princeton University, USA) was entitled " The Soviet Union as a Successor State: the Society of Iranian-Soviet Cultural Relations, the Iranian Left and the Soviet Reality 1941-1953.". In his opinion, during the Second World War and in the years following it, the All-Union Society for Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries (VOKS) not only conducted cultural and educational activities, but also promoted socialist ideas among Iranians. This area of VOX's activity, as D. Pickett emphasizes, was one of the first attempts to extend VOX's activities to Asian countries bordering the USSR. To successfully spread socialist ideas among the Iranian left, VOX propagandists used some of the scientific theories developed by Soviet Orientalists, such as the theory of the common cultural heritage of Iran and a number of republics that are part of the USSR. The speaker noted that the Iranian left not only perceived Soviet propaganda, but also actively used VOX resources to open an Iranian-Russian cultural society with branches in various regions of the USSR. The focus of Iranian propaganda was Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan.

M. Liesenberg (University of Amsterdam) in his report "Soviet Oriental Studies and the study of small languages (on the example of Kurdish)" noted that the Soviet Union was not an empire in the sense in which E. Said interpreted this concept, since one of the main ideological postulates was the liberation of oppressed peoples and classes. Nevertheless, in the study of certain issues, Oriental studies partially reproduced bourgeois concepts. This was most clearly shown in the study of the Kurdish language, which occupies a secondary place in Soviet studies in relation to Persian, Arabic and Turkish.

During the discussion on the reports, the conference organizers proposed to discuss the question of E. Said's views as applied to Russian Oriental studies. Scientists have come to the conclusion that the views of the author of Orientalism, which made a lot of noise more than 30 years ago, are hardly applicable to Russia's policy in Central Asia and to the works of Russian scientists.

Permanent link to this publication: