Contribution of the Oriental Commission of the Imperial Moscow Archaeological Society to Exploration of the Caucasus (1887-1915)
https://doi.org/10.22162/2075-7794-2016-24-2-50-56
Abstract
The research activities of the Imperial Moscow Archaeological Society founded by count A. S. Uvarov in 1864 were first concentrated mainly in the fields of Russian history, archaeology, traditional culture. The 5th Archaeological Congress held in 1881 in Tiflis laid the foundation for systematic studies of the Caucasus. Further archaeological, historical, folklore and linguistic researches among different peoples of the North Caucasus resulted in the establishment of the Oriental Commission as part of the Imperial Moscow Archaeological Society in 1887. The aim of the Commission was to study all non-Slavic peoples of the former Russian Empire. Since the Commission comprised specialists of mostly Caucasian origin that worked in various scientific and educational institutions of Moscow, peoples of the North Caucasus and Transcaucasia became central to their research. In 27 years the Oriental Commission conducted a number of archaeological expeditions throughout the Caucasus; its employees were engaged in searches, investigation, translation and publication of diverse manuscripts and printed materials on various peoples of the Caucasus, made a huge contribution to the identification, restoration and preservation of valuable cultural artifacts of Caucasian history for future generations; contributed a lot to the education of the first national intelligentsia representatives among different peoples of the Caucasus who were to explore their native land. The results of this truly herculean work that can hardly be overestimated were systematically published in several periodicals. A series of works of the Ancient East (journal) published by the Oriental Commission are especially noteworthy. Not only academic works of the Oriental Commission employees were regularly published but also the records of its regular meetings at which these works had been discussed carefully were published in the Ancient East. A careful study of all these documentary sources has allowed the author to not only have a close look at the history of the creation of the Oriental Commission but also evaluate that enormous amount of work carried out at the turn of the 20th century. Moreover, researches conducted by members of the Oriental Commission largely determined the path of development of Caucasian studies in the 20th century.
References
1. Alieva A. I. Akademik V. F. Miller i razvitie rossijskogo akademicheskogo kavkazovedenija v konce XIX – nachale XX vv. V. F. Miller. Fol’klor narodov Severnogo Kavkaza. Teksty. Issledovanija [Academician V.F. Miller and Development of Academic Caucasian Studies in Russia in the Late 19th – early 20th Centuries.V. F. Miller. Folklore of the North Caucasian peoples. Texts. Case studies]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 2008, pp. 44–52 (In Russian).
2. Anisimov I. Sh. Kavkazskie evrei-gorcy: sb. mat-lov po jetnografi i [Mountain Jews of the Caucasus: ethnographic digest]. Moscow, E. G. Potapov Print. House, 1888, Is. 3, pp. 173–190 (In Russian).
3. Digorskie skazanija po zapisjam digorcev I. T. Sobieva, K. S. Gardanova i S. A. Tukkaeva, per. i primech. V. Millera [Digor Folk Tales Recorded by the Digors I. T. Sobiev, K. S. Gardanov and S. A. Tukkaev, trans. and notes. V. Miller]. Moscow, V. Gattsuk Print. House, 1902, 150 p. Trudy po vostokovedeniju. Lazarevskij institut vostochnyh jazykov. Vyp. 2. 352 s. (Works on Orientalism. Lazarev Institute of Oriental Languages. Is. 2. 352 p.) (In Russian).
4. Drevnosti [Antiquities]. Moscow, G. Lissner and D. Sovko Print. House, 1880, vol. 8, p. 86 (In Russian).
5. Drevnosti [Antiquities]. Moscow, G. Lissner and D. Sovko Print. House, 1881, vol. 9, p. 70 (In Russian).
6. Drevnosti vostochnye [Oriental Antiquities]. Moscow, G. Lissner and D. Sovko Print. House, 1896, vol. 1, is. 1, p. 74 (In Russian).
7. Khakhanov A. S. Abbreviatury staro-gruzinskih rukopisej. Drevnosti vostochnye [Abbreviations of Old Georgian manuscripts. Oriental Antiquities]. Moscow, G. Lissner and D. Sovko Print. House, 1913, pp. 148–151 (In Russian).
8. Khakhanov A. S. Gruzinskaja rukopisnaja pojema «Barsova kozha» iz Glavnogo Arhiva Ministerstva inostrannyh del. Drevnosti vostochnye [Georgian handwritten poem “The Panther’s Skin” stored in the Principal Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Oriental Antiquities]. Vol. 2, Is. 1. Moscow, G. Lissner and D. Sovko Print. House, 1896, pp. 74– 101; Obsuzhdenie doklada: Hahanov A. S. O gruzinskoj rukopisi «Barsova kozha». Drevnosti vostochnye (Discussion about the report by A. S. Khakhanov On the Georgian manuscript “The Panther’s. Skin”. Oriental Antiquities). Vol. 2, Is. 1. Moscow, G. Lissner and D. Sovko Print. House, 1896, pp. 126–127 (In Russian).
9. Khakhanov A. S. Gruzinskij apokrif o sude Pilata nad Iisusom Hristom. Drevnosti vostochnye [Georgian apocrypha about Jesus Christ’s Trial before Pilate. Khakhanov]. Vol. 3, Is. 1, Moscow, G. Lissner and D. Sovko Print. House, 1907, pp. 17 (In Russian).
10. Khalatyants G. A. Itogi nauchnoj kritiki «Istorii Armenii» Moiseja Horenskogo. Drevnosti vostochnye [Outcomes of scientifi c criticism of Movses Khorenatsi’s History of Armenia. Oriental Antiquities]. Moscow, G. Lissner and D. Sovko Print. House, 1907, vol. 3, is. 1, p. 9 (In Russian).
11. Khalatyants G. A. Nachalo kriticheskogo izuchenija «Istorii» Moiseja Horenskogo. Drevnosti vostochnye [Early critical studies of Movses Khorenatsi’s History. Oriental Antiquities]. Moscow, G. Lissner and D. Sovko Print. House, 1896, vol. 2, Is. 1, pp. 118–120 (In Russian).
12. Khalatyants G. A. N. Ja. Marr o kritike «Istorii» Moiseja Horenskogo. Drevnosti vostochnye [N. Ya. Marr on criticism of Movses Khorenatsi’s History. Oriental Antiquities]. Moscow, G. Lissner and D. Sovko Print. House, 1901, vol. 2, is. 2, pp. 160–161 (In Russian).
13. Miller V. F. Materialy dlja izuchenija evrejskotatskogo jazyka: vvedenie, teksty, slovar’ [Judeo-Tat Language Learning Materials: introduction, texts, dictionary]. Saint Petersburg, the Academy of Sciences Publ., 1892, 105 p. (In Russian).
14. Miller V. F. Rech’, proiznesennaja direktorom instituta v torzhestvennom sobranii 24 oktjabrja 1902 g. cpecial’nyh klassov Lazarevskogo instituta vostochnyh jazykov [Speech delivered by the Director of the Institute at the solemn meeting of major work classes of the Lazarev Institute of Oriental Languages on 24 October 1902]. Moscow, 1903, p. 13 (In Russian).
15. Nikolsky M. V. Motivirovannoe predlozhenie ob obrazovanii Vostochnoj komissii. Drevnosti vostochnye [Reasoned proposal for the establishment of the Oriental Commission. Oriental Antiquities]. Moscow, G. Lissner and D. Sovko Print. House, 1889, vol. 1, is. 1, pp. 1–11 (In Russian).
16. Nikolsky M. V. Vsevolod Fedorovich Miller kak vostokoved. Drevnosti [Vsevolod Fedorovich Miller as a Orientalist scholar]. Moscow, G. Lissner and D. Sovko Print. House, 1914, vol. 24, p. 256 (In Russian).
17. Programma dlja issledovanija drevnostej Kavkaza, sostavlennaja IMAO. Drevnosti [IMAS Program for exploration of Caucasian Antiquities]. Moscow, G. Lissner and D. Sovko Print. House, 1889, vol. 13, is. 1, pp. 1–20 (In Russian).
Review
For citations:
Alieva A.I. Contribution of the Oriental Commission of the Imperial Moscow Archaeological Society to Exploration of the Caucasus (1887-1915). Oriental Studies. 2016;9(2):50-56. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22162/2075-7794-2016-24-2-50-56
Views:
326
Email this article 