<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="ru"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">kigiran</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="ru">Oriental Studies</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Oriental Studies</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">2619-0990</issn><issn pub-type="epub">2619-1008</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Federal State Budgetary Institution of Science «Kalmyk Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences» (KalmSC RAS)</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">kigiran-1182</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>ИСТОРИЯ</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>HISTORY</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Тибетский контекст в хошутско-цинских отношениях:  от равенства к подчинению</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>The Tibetan Context in Khoshut-Qing Relations: from Equality to Subordination</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4031-5667</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Китинов</surname><given-names>Баатр Учаевич</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Kitinov</surname><given-names>Baatr</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>кандидат исторических наук, доцент,</p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Between the 1600s and 1630s, the Khoshuts were the most powerful Oirat tribe. Therefore, when the leaders of the Gelug school made an appeal to Oirats for military assistance in the intersect struggle in Tibet, the chuulgan (Mong. ‘congress’) of Oirat rulers made a decision to send some combined forces to the Land of Snows. After the successful campaign of the Khoshut Güshi Khan in 1637–1642, the Fifth Dalai Lama Lobsang Gyatso, who became the spiritual and secular head of Tibet, granted him and his descendants the titles ‘Ruler of Faith’ (Tib. chogyal) and ‘King of Tibet’ (Tib. gyalpo). Then, Güshi Khan established close relations with the Manchu Qing dynasty, the new rulers of China, and managed the organization of his own state in Qinghai for which he wrote the main legislative act known as Khökhnuuryn chuulgany tsaazyn bichig. However, his sons divided the domain into two parts — Tibetan and Kokonor (Qinhai) ones between which, especially at the time of Gyalpo Lhabzang, Gushi Khan’s grand-grandson, tensions and hostility arose. Lhabzang also entered into a confrontation with the powerful desi (Tib. ‘regent’) Sangye Gyatso which resulted in death of the latter in 1705. The Sixth Dalai Lama Tsangyang Gyatso’s displacement by Lhabzang and the appointment of the new Dalai Lama, Ngawang Yeshe Gyatso, led to an escalation of hostilities with other Oirats which resulted in the capture of Lhasa by the Dzungars in 1717 and the establishment — due to the Qing support — of the Seventh Dalai Lama Kelzang Gyatso’s rule in Tibet. The Qing government had approved a new administrative structure in Tibet — Kashag — the leaders of which Kanchenne and Pholanay had somewhat special relationships with the Khoshuts: the first one was Lhabzang’s son-in-law, and the latter was considered an incarnation of Galdan Tsewang, Güshi Khan’s grandson. Khoshuts were viewed upon by the Fifth Dalai Lama as an important force for the future of the Gelug school, and Manchus also intended to preserve the role of Khoshuts in Tibet, but after the 1723 attempted Kokonor uprising by Luvsandanzan in the region, Beijing completely and dramatically changed its policies: the Khoshuts lost the right to be kings of Tibet, and were incorporated into the Qing Empire.</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">kitinov@mail.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff-1"><aff xml:lang="ru"><institution>Российский университет дружбы народов (Москва, Российская Федерация)</institution><country>Россия</country></aff><aff xml:lang="en"><institution>Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (Moscow, Russian Federation)</institution><country>Russian Federation</country></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2018</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>05</day><month>09</month><year>2018</year></pub-date><volume>11</volume><issue>2</issue><fpage>20</fpage><lpage>28</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Китинов Б.У., 2018</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2018</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Китинов Б.У.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Kitinov B.</copyright-holder><license xml:lang="ru" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.</license-p></license><license xml:lang="en" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://kigiran.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/1182">https://kigiran.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/1182</self-uri><abstract><p>Хошуты оказались вовлечены в события в Тибете после обращения глав школы Гелук к ойратам за военной помощью. После успешной кампании хошутского Гуши-хана в 1637–1642 гг. ставший во главе Тибета Далай-лама Пятый Лобсан Гьяцо даровал ему и его потомкам титулы правителя веры (чогьял) и царя (гьялпо) Тибета. Завершение войны сопровождалось установлением Гуши-ханом тесных отношений с маньчжурами и организацией собственного государства в Цинхае, для чего им был разработан основной законодательный акт. После смерти Гуши-хана его сыновья разделили владения на две части — лхасско-тибетскую и кукунорскую, между которыми, особенно при гьялпо Лхавзане, возникли трения и вражда. Также Лхавзан вступил в противостояние с могущественным дэси Сангье Гьяцо, которое завершилось гибелью дэси в 1705 г. Смещение Лхавзаном Далай-ламы Шестого Цаньяна Гьяцо и назначение нового Далай-ламы Нгаванга Еше Гьяцо приведет к эскалации отношений с другими ойратами, что завершится захватом Лхасы джунгарами в 1717 г. и в дальнейшем приходом к власти Седьмого Далай-ламы Калсана Гьяцо. Цинское правительство утвердит новую структуру власти в Тибете — кашаг, лидеры которого, Канченнэ и Пхоланай, будут иметь особого рода отношение к хошутам. Вероятно, маньчжуры хотели сохранить роль хошутов в Тибете, однако после восстания Лобсана Данзина в 1723 г. Пекин изменил политику: хошуты потеряли право быть царями Тибета и вошли в состав Цинской империи.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Between the 1600s and 1630s, the Khoshuts were the most powerful Oirat tribe. Therefore, when the leaders of the Gelug school made an appeal to Oirats for military assistance in the intersect struggle in Tibet, the chuulgan (Mong. ‘congress’) of Oirat rulers made a decision to send some combined forces to the Land of Snows. After the successful campaign of the Khoshut Güshi Khan in 1637–1642, the Fifth Dalai Lama Lobsang Gyatso, who became the spiritual and secular head of Tibet, granted him and his descendants the titles ‘Ruler of Faith’ (Tib. chogyal) and ‘King of Tibet’ (Tib. gyalpo). Then, Güshi Khan established close relations with the Manchu Qing dynasty, the new rulers of China, and managed the organization of his own state in Qinghai for which he wrote the main legislative act known as Khökhnuuryn chuulgany tsaazyn bichig. However, his sons divided the domain into two parts — Tibetan and Kokonor (Qinhai) ones between which, especially at the time of Gyalpo Lhabzang, Gushi Khan’s grand-grandson, tensions and hostility arose. Lhabzang also entered into a confrontation with the powerful desi (Tib. ‘regent’) Sangye Gyatso which resulted in death of the latter in 1705. The Sixth Dalai Lama Tsangyang Gyatso’s displacement by Lhabzang and the appointment of the new Dalai Lama, Ngawang Yeshe Gyatso, led to an escalation of hostilities with other Oirats which resulted in the capture of Lhasa by the Dzungars in 1717 and the establishment — due to the Qing support — of the Seventh Dalai Lama Kelzang Gyatso’s rule in Tibet. The Qing government had approved a new administrative structure in Tibet — Kashag — the leaders of which Kanchenne and Pholanay had somewhat special relationships with the Khoshuts: the first one was Lhabzang’s son-in-law, and the latter was considered an incarnation of Galdan Tsewang, Güshi Khan’s grandson. Khoshuts were viewed upon by the Fifth Dalai Lama as an important force for the future of the Gelug school, and Manchus also intended to preserve the role of Khoshuts in Tibet, but after the 1723 attempted Kokonor uprising by Luvsandanzan in the region, Beijing completely and dramatically changed its policies: the Khoshuts lost the right to be kings of Tibet, and were incorporated into the Qing Empire.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>Гуши-хан</kwd><kwd>Далай-лама</kwd><kwd>дэси</kwd><kwd>Кукунор</kwd><kwd>Лхавзан</kwd><kwd>хошуты</kwd><kwd>Цин</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>Güshi Khan</kwd><kwd>Dalai Lama</kwd><kwd>desi</kwd><kwd>Kokonor</kwd><kwd>Lhabzang</kwd><kwd>Khoshut</kwd><kwd>Qing</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Гончог 2008 ― Гончог-Чжигмэд-Ванбо. Повествование о жизни Всеведущего Чжамьян-Шадбий-Дорчже, могущественного ученого и сиддха, называющееся «Брод, ведущий к удивительно благому уделу» / Введен., перев., комментарии Н. В. Цыремпилова. Улан-Удэ: Изд-во БНЦ СО РАН, 2008. 312 с. [Könchog Jigme Wangpo. Povestvovanie o zhizni Vseveduschego Chzham’yan-Shadbiy-Dorchzhe, moguschestvennogo uchenogo i siddkha, nazyvayuscheesya «Brod, veduschiy k udivitel’no blagomu udelu» [A narrative called ‘The Ford towards the Virtuous Lot’ about the life of all-knowing Jamyang Shepa Dorje, a mighty scholar and siddha]. V. Tsyrempilov (intr., foreword, comm.). Ulan-Ude: Buryat Scientific Center of SB of RAS, 2008. 312 p.]</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Гончог 2008 ― Гончог-Чжигмэд-Ванбо. Повествование о жизни Всеведущего Чжамьян-Шадбий-Дорчже, могущественного ученого и сиддха, называющееся «Брод, ведущий к удивительно благому уделу» / Введен., перев., комментарии Н. В. Цыремпилова. Улан-Удэ: Изд-во БНЦ СО РАН, 2008. 312 с. [Könchog Jigme Wangpo. Povestvovanie o zhizni Vseveduschego Chzham’yan-Shadbiy-Dorchzhe, moguschestvennogo uchenogo i siddkha, nazyvayuscheesya «Brod, veduschiy k udivitel’no blagomu udelu» [A narrative called ‘The Ford towards the Virtuous Lot’ about the life of all-knowing Jamyang Shepa Dorje, a mighty scholar and siddha]. V. Tsyrempilov (intr., foreword, comm.). Ulan-Ude: Buryat Scientific Center of SB of RAS, 2008. 312 p.]</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">История 2016 ― История Хо-Урлюка // Санчиров В. П. Письменные памятники по истории ойратов XVII–XVIII веков. Элиста: КИГИ РАН, 2016. С. 29–35. [Kho Orluk’s history. Pis’mennye pamyatniki po istorii oyratov XVII–XVIII vekov [History of the Oirats: written monuments, 17th-18th centuries]. Sanchirov V. P. (comp.). Elista: Kalmyk Humanities Research Institute of RAS, 2016. Pp. 29–35].</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">История 2016 ― История Хо-Урлюка // Санчиров В. П. Письменные памятники по истории ойратов XVII–XVIII веков. Элиста: КИГИ РАН, 2016. С. 29–35. [Kho Orluk’s history. Pis’mennye pamyatniki po istorii oyratov XVII–XVIII vekov [History of the Oirats: written monuments, 17th-18th centuries]. Sanchirov V. P. (comp.). Elista: Kalmyk Humanities Research Institute of RAS, 2016. Pp. 29–35].</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Люлина 2016 ― Люлина А. Г. Тибетские институты власти и цинская система администрирования: особенности взаимодействия (середина XVII – конец XVIII вв.). Дисс… канд. ист. наук. М., 2016. 183 с. [Lyulina A. G. Tibetskie instituty vlasti i tsinskaya sistema administrirovaniya: osobennosti vzaimodeystviya (seredina XVII – konets XVIII vv.) [Tibetan government institutions and the Qing administrative system: peculiarities of mutual relations (mid-17th – late 18th cc.)]. A PhD thesis. Moscow, 2016. 183 p.]</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Люлина 2016 ― Люлина А. Г. Тибетские институты власти и цинская система администрирования: особенности взаимодействия (середина XVII – конец XVIII вв.). Дисс… канд. ист. наук. М., 2016. 183 с. [Lyulina A. G. Tibetskie instituty vlasti i tsinskaya sistema administrirovaniya: osobennosti vzaimodeystviya (seredina XVII – konets XVIII vv.) [Tibetan government institutions and the Qing administrative system: peculiarities of mutual relations (mid-17th – late 18th cc.)]. A PhD thesis. Moscow, 2016. 183 p.]</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Мартынов 1978 ― Мартынов А. С. Статус Тибета в ХVII–ХVIII веках в традиционной китайской системе политических представлений. М.: Наука, 1978. 284 c. [Martynov A. S. Status Tibeta v XVII–XVIII vekakh v traditsionnoy kitayskoy sisteme politicheskikh predstavleniy [Tibet’s status within the traditional Chinese political science framework: 17th-18th cc.]. Moscow: Nauka, 1978. 284 p.].</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Мартынов 1978 ― Мартынов А. С. Статус Тибета в ХVII–ХVIII веках в традиционной китайской системе политических представлений. М.: Наука, 1978. 284 c. [Martynov A. S. Status Tibeta v XVII–XVIII vekakh v traditsionnoy kitayskoy sisteme politicheskikh predstavleniy [Tibet’s status within the traditional Chinese political science framework: 17th-18th cc.]. Moscow: Nauka, 1978. 284 p.].</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Солощева 2013 ― Солощева М. А. Кукунорский мятеж 1723–1724 годов и его значение для истории Тибета // Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Сер. 13. Востоковедение. Африканистика. 2013. Вып. 1. С. 58–67. [Soloscheva M. A. The Kokonor Revolt of 1723–1724 and its historic significance for Tibet. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Ser. 13. Vostokovedenie. Afrikanistika. 2013. Iss. 1. Pp. 58–67].</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Солощева 2013 ― Солощева М. А. Кукунорский мятеж 1723–1724 годов и его значение для истории Тибета // Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Сер. 13. Востоковедение. Африканистика. 2013. Вып. 1. С. 58–67. [Soloscheva M. A. The Kokonor Revolt of 1723–1724 and its historic significance for Tibet. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Ser. 13. Vostokovedenie. Afrikanistika. 2013. Iss. 1. Pp. 58–67].</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Успенский 2014 ― Успенский В. Л. О государстве Гуши-хана // Тибетология в Санкт-Петербурге. Сб. ст. Выпуск 1. СПб.: Петербургское востоковедение, 2014. С. 52–59. [Uspensky V. L. Güshi Khan’s state. Tibetologiya v Sankt-Peterburge. Collected papers. Iss. 1. St. Petersburg: Peterburgskoe Vostokovedenie, 2014. Pp. 52–59].</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Успенский 2014 ― Успенский В. Л. О государстве Гуши-хана // Тибетология в Санкт-Петербурге. Сб. ст. Выпуск 1. СПб.: Петербургское востоковедение, 2014. С. 52–59. [Uspensky V. L. Güshi Khan’s state. Tibetologiya v Sankt-Peterburge. Collected papers. Iss. 1. St. Petersburg: Peterburgskoe Vostokovedenie, 2014. Pp. 52–59].</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Успенский 2011 ― Успенский В. Л. Тибетский буддизм в Пекине. СПб.: Студия НП-Принт, 2011. 367 с. [Uspensky V. L. Tibetskiy buddizm v Pekine [Tibetan Buddhism in Beijing]. St. Petersburg: Studiya NP-Print, 2011. 367 p.]</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Успенский 2011 ― Успенский В. Л. Тибетский буддизм в Пекине. СПб.: Студия НП-Принт, 2011. 367 с. [Uspensky V. L. Tibetskiy buddizm v Pekine [Tibetan Buddhism in Beijing]. St. Petersburg: Studiya NP-Print, 2011. 367 p.]</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Цэнгэл 2017 ― Хошууд Цэнгэл. «Алтан хааны цаазын бичиг» хийгээд Гууш хааны «Цаазын бичиг»-ийн харьцаа, холбогдол // Ойрад ба дээд монголын туух, сурвалж бичгийн судлал. Улаанбаатар, 2017. С. 118–144. [Khoshuud Tsengel. Altan Khan’s Code of Laws and that of Gushi Khan: a comparative study. Oyrad ba deed mongolyn tuukh [History of the Oirats and Upper Mongols]. A student’s book. Ulaanbaatar, 2017. Pp. 118–144].</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Цэнгэл 2017 ― Хошууд Цэнгэл. «Алтан хааны цаазын бичиг» хийгээд Гууш хааны «Цаазын бичиг»-ийн харьцаа, холбогдол // Ойрад ба дээд монголын туух, сурвалж бичгийн судлал. Улаанбаатар, 2017. С. 118–144. [Khoshuud Tsengel. Altan Khan’s Code of Laws and that of Gushi Khan: a comparative study. Oyrad ba deed mongolyn tuukh [History of the Oirats and Upper Mongols]. A student’s book. Ulaanbaatar, 2017. Pp. 118–144].</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Шакабпа 2003 ― Шакабпа В. Д. Тибет: Политическая история. Пер. с англ. А. Дюранова. СПб.: Нартанг, 2003. 432 с. [Shakabpa W. D. Tibet: a political history. A. Dyuranov (transl.). St. Petersburg: Nartang, 2003. 432 p.].</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Шакабпа 2003 ― Шакабпа В. Д. Тибет: Политическая история. Пер. с англ. А. Дюранова. СПб.: Нартанг, 2003. 432 с. [Shakabpa W. D. Tibet: a political history. A. Dyuranov (transl.). St. Petersburg: Nartang, 2003. 432 p.].</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">A Collection 1995 ― A Collection of Historical Archives of Tibet. Beijing: Cultural Relics Publishing House, 1995. 107 р.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">A Collection 1995 ― A Collection of Historical Archives of Tibet. Beijing: Cultural Relics Publishing House, 1995. 107 р.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Bod mi’i 2002 ― Bod mi’i khrims mthun gzhung dga’ ldan pho brang dbu brnyes nas lo 360 ‘khor ba’i bka’ drin rjes dran dang ma ongs mdun bskyod kyi kha phyogs. Dharamsala: LTWA, 2002. 458 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Bod mi’i 2002 ― Bod mi’i khrims mthun gzhung dga’ ldan pho brang dbu brnyes nas lo 360 ‘khor ba’i bka’ drin rjes dran dang ma ongs mdun bskyod kyi kha phyogs. Dharamsala: LTWA, 2002. 458 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Heissig 1962 ― Heissig W. Some Notes by Sung-yün on the Administration of Tibet. Oriens Extremus. 1962. Vol. 9. No. 1. Pp. 85–89.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Heissig 1962 ― Heissig W. Some Notes by Sung-yün on the Administration of Tibet. Oriens Extremus. 1962. Vol. 9. No. 1. Pp. 85–89.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ishihama 1997 ― Ishihama Y. New Light on the ‘Chinese Conquest of Tibet’ in 1720 (based on the new Manchu sources). Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 7th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Graz 1995. Krasser H., Much M. T., Steinkellner E., Tauscher H. (eds.). Vol. 1–2. Wien: Austrian Academy of Sciences, 1997. Pp. 419–426.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ishihama 1997 ― Ishihama Y. New Light on the ‘Chinese Conquest of Tibet’ in 1720 (based on the new Manchu sources). Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 7th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Graz 1995. Krasser H., Much M. T., Steinkellner E., Tauscher H. (eds.). Vol. 1–2. Wien: Austrian Academy of Sciences, 1997. Pp. 419–426.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit14"><label>14</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ngag bdang 2012 ― Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho. Rgyal dbang lnga pa ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho’i rnam thar du ku la’i gos bzang [The autobiography of the Fifth Dalai Lama]. Lhasa: Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, 2012. Vol. 1. 640 р.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ngag bdang 2012 ― Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho. Rgyal dbang lnga pa ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho’i rnam thar du ku la’i gos bzang [The autobiography of the Fifth Dalai Lama]. Lhasa: Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, 2012. Vol. 1. 640 р.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit15"><label>15</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Petech 1966 ― Petech L. Notes on Tibetan History of the 18th Century. T’oung Pao, Second Series. 1966. Vol. 52. Livr. 4/5. Pp. 261–292.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Petech 1966 ― Petech L. Notes on Tibetan History of the 18th Century. T’oung Pao, Second Series. 1966. Vol. 52. Livr. 4/5. Pp. 261–292.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit16"><label>16</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Petech 1972 ― Petech L. China and Tibet in the early 18th Century. History of the Establishment of the Chinese Protectorate in Tibet. Leiden: Brill, 1972. 309 р.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Petech 1972 ― Petech L. China and Tibet in the early 18th Century. History of the Establishment of the Chinese Protectorate in Tibet. Leiden: Brill, 1972. 309 р.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit17"><label>17</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ruegg 2003 ― Ruegg D. S. Mchod yon, yon mchod and mchod gnas / yon gnas: on the historiography and semantics of a Tibetan religio-social and religio-political concept. The History of Tibet. A. McKay (ed.). London – New York: Routledge Curzon, 2003. Vol. 2. Pp. 362–372.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ruegg 2003 ― Ruegg D. S. Mchod yon, yon mchod and mchod gnas / yon gnas: on the historiography and semantics of a Tibetan religio-social and religio-political concept. The History of Tibet. A. McKay (ed.). London – New York: Routledge Curzon, 2003. Vol. 2. Pp. 362–372.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit18"><label>18</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Sperling 2012 ― Sperling E. Pho-lha-nas, Khang-chen-nas, and the last era of Mongol domination in Tibet. Rocznik Orientalistyczny, 2012. Vol. 65. Part 1. Pp. 195–211.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Sperling 2012 ― Sperling E. Pho-lha-nas, Khang-chen-nas, and the last era of Mongol domination in Tibet. Rocznik Orientalistyczny, 2012. Vol. 65. Part 1. Pp. 195–211.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit19"><label>19</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Sum-pa 1969 ― Sum-pa mkhan-po Ye-shes dpal-’byor. The annals of Kokonor. Ho-Chin Yang (transl.). Indiana University Publications. Uralic and Altaic Series. Vol. 106. Bloomington: Indiana University; The Hague: Mouton and Co., 1969. 125 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Sum-pa 1969 ― Sum-pa mkhan-po Ye-shes dpal-’byor. The annals of Kokonor. Ho-Chin Yang (transl.). Indiana University Publications. Uralic and Altaic Series. Vol. 106. Bloomington: Indiana University; The Hague: Mouton and Co., 1969. 125 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
