Search

Goals. The article analyzes materials from anniversary events, historical discussions, examines fundamental publications and academic editions for an insight into the evolution of ideas about Buryatia’s historical path. Ceremonial events and publications issued on the occasion of anniversaries are of particular historiographic value: on the one hand, those reflect achievements and problems of a certain period, and, on the other hand, narrate about dominant political ideologies and patterns of historical consciousness. In the meantime, anniversary scientific conferences usually attended by leading officials and scholars of the Republic were to somewhat comprehend actual results and discuss further development prospects. Materials and methods. The paper examines documents stored at the State Archive of Buryatia, Scientific Archives of the Buryat Scientific Center (SB RAS), Center of Oriental Manuscripts and Xylographs affiliated to the Institute for Mongolian, Buddhist and Tibetan Studies (SB RAS). The principle of historicism proves instrumental in reconstructing how historical thought has evolved within the general trends of state development and Buryatia’s political life throughout the 100 years. Results. On 30 May 1923, the Presidium of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee decided to unite Siberian and Far Eastern autonomous oblasts of Buryat-Mongols into one autonomous socialist Soviet republic to be centered around the city of Verkhneudinsk. In terms of theory pertaining to historical science and historical enlightenment, the formation of the Buryat-Mongol ASSR set forth a most important task of comprehending experiences and paths of Buryatia’s peoples in accordance with the Marxist-Leninist paradigm of historical process, while in terms of practice it was urgent to substantiate the Soviet ideology and socialist reforms. All this required that experts joined their efforts to develop conventional approaches in the field of historical knowledge and nation/state building. So, the history of Buryatia was to be generalized and systemized by the academic publications as follows: History of the Buryat-Mongol ASSR (1951, 1954, 1959); Essays on Buryatia’s History and Culture (1972, 1974); History of Buryatia in three volumes (2011), etc. The 100th anniversary of the Republic has been welcomed with another two-volume edition — Republic of Buryatia in the 20th–21st Centuries: Chronicles, Events, Comments — that provides a systemic overview of its peoples’ historical paths (and milestones), illustrates quantitative and qualitative transformations in politics, economy, culture, and demography, that had formed a vector of progressive and constructive development which survived even in most dramatic periods. The centenary celebrations have been pinnacled by the international scientific conference — Cross-Border Regions of Russia’s East in Modernization Processes, 20th–21st Centuries: [Celebrating the] 100th Anniversary of the Republic of Buryatia.

Introduction. The article deals with exports and imports of precious metals between Russia and the Qing Empire in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Special attention is paid to activities of the Russo-Chinese Bank that established its offices across Russia-Mongolia frontiers for the latter to arrange silver trade with China. Goals. The paper aims to reveal actual causes, conditions and mechanisms of silver transit from Europe to China — and identify the role played by the Russo-Chinese Bank therein. Materials and methods. The study examines statutes and regulations, reports of the Russo-Chinese Bank, and previously unpublished records management and statistical documents stored at the State Archive of Buryatia (Collection of Kyakhta Customs Station and that of Kyakhta-based first-guild merchant M. Nemchinov, respectively). The work employs a number of historical research methods, special emphasis be laid on the principle of historicism and the comprehensive analysis method that have proved instrumental in interrelating the mid-to-late nineteenth and early twentieth century geopolitical events across Asia-Pacific — to the intensification of Russia-China precious metals trade. Results. The paper virtually reconstructs the mechanism developed by the Russo-Chinese Bank in Russia-Mongolia frontier territories to export precious metals from Western Europe to the Qing Empire. Conclusions. The late nineteenth-century weakening of the Qing Empire and subsequent changes in the balance of power across Inner Asia significantly modified the region’s geopolitical agenda. The altered vectors of external policies towards Asia Pacific enabled the Russian Empire to successfully expand its economic presence in China at the turn of the 20th century. The Tsarist government did succeed in holding strong positions in China’s market of precious metals via a specially created ‘tool’ — the Russo-Chinese Bank. The efficient combination of Russia’s smart trade strategies and special customs preferences yielded a highly profitable business of precious metals transit from Europe to China. And it was Kyakhta Office of the Russo-Chinese Bank that played a key role in securing uninterrupted supply of precious metals.

Goals. The article aims to consider some key historical milestones and achievements in Buryatia’s nation-state building for over 100 years. The paper analyzes the conditions for the emergence of Buryat-Mongolian autonomy, and the factors that prompted reorganizations of the Republic’s political structure in the context of changes witnessed in the nationwide political agenda. Special attention is paid to the contribution of the Republic to the Great Victory, certain analytical emphases be laid on present-day challenges, achievements and development prospects. Materials and methods. The work examines unpublished documents stored at the State Archive of the Russian Federation, Russian State Archive of Sociopolitical History, and State Archive of Buryatia. The principles of historicism and consistency prove instrumental enough in reconstructing the process of nation-state building in Buryatia, identifying specific features, and tracing general trends of state development in the Republic’s political life. Results. On 30 May 1923, the Presidium of the All-Russia Central Executive Committee decided to unite Siberian and Far Eastern autonomous domains (oblasts) of Buryat-Mongols into one autonomous socialist Soviet republic centered around the city of Verkhneudinsk. It is then and there that the statehood of Buryat-Mongols — consolidated by a single territory, economic integrity, and historical ties of all resident peoples — was proclaimed. The shaping and rapid development of industries in the Republic, transformations in agriculture, education and health care converted the territory of Buryatia into a strong supporting point that would render every possible assistance to the nation during the Great Patriotic War. The post-war years up to the 1960s and early 1970s became a period of progressive development in all spheres of life. At the all-Union level, merits of the Republic were distinguished with the Order of Lenin (1958), Order of Friendship of Peoples (1972), and Order of the October Revolution (1973). Events of the late 1980s and the subsequent collapse of the USSR served as a test of state viability to the Republic. The economic depression led to an unprecedented deterioration of the social situation which could actually result in a severest interethnic conflict. However, the accumulated experiences of cross-cultural interaction, flexible administrative and managerial systems, high educational and scientific levels of the population, and a unified language environment proved instrumental in neutralizing negative trends and strengthening constructive ones — as part of interethnic dialogue within the new statehood of Russia. Despite the complicated processes of the 1980s–1990s, Buryatia confirmed its loyalty to the principles of federalism and integrity of Russia. Another important milestone was the 1994 adoption of the Constitution of the Republic of Buryatia. Over the past hundred years, the Republic has developed as a major political/legal entity of the Russian Federation — in cultural, economic, and other aspects. Nowadays, the peoples of Buryatia — regardless of faith and ethnic identity — join efforts to develop public economy and culture, shape a common destiny of the Republic and the country on the basis of friendship, harmony, and mutual understanding.

Goals. The article seeks to reveal specifics of historical science’s institutionalization in the Buryat-Mongol ASSR throughout the 1920s and 1930s. It analyzes the conditions to have accompanied the development of historical science in the prerevolutionary era, peculiarities in the shaping of new organizational forms for historical research in the Republic (scientific institution, scientific society, museums and archives), and a corresponding educational infrastructure. Much attention is paid to the analysis of history and ethnography research endeavors of scientific societies (Dorzhi Banzarov Buryat-Mongol Society, Troitskosavsk-Kyakhta Branch of the Russian Geographical Society) and the first scientific institution of the Republic to have evolved from Buryat-Mongol Scientific Committee into the State Institute of Language, Literature and Cultural History during the mentioned period. Materials and methods. The paper examines unpublished documents stored at the Center of Oriental Manuscripts and Xylographs (Institute for Mongolian, Buddhist and Tibetan Studies SB RAS), Scientific Archive of the Buryat Scientific Center (SB RAS), and the State Archive of Buryatia. The principles of historicism and systemacity employed make it possible to reconstruct the process of historical science’s institutionalization in the young Buryat-Mongol autonomy, the latter having been determined by objectives of scientific, cultural, social, economic and political development of the Soviet state. This has yielded a balanced approach aimed to characterize the ideological predicaments faced by the humanities in earliest decades of the BMASSR. Results. The first post-October decade witnessed the shaping of a conceptually new paradigm of historical science based on Marxist-Leninist ideologies — paralleled by the formation of Buryat-Mongolia’s infrastructure of historical science represented by institutions of science and education, public organizations and archives. In methodological terms, the very historical science was being developed ‘under the flag of local history’ with the typically insufficient detailing and generalizing nature of historical problem statements. The first 1926 meeting on ethnic culture and the 1934 meeting on controversial issues of Buryat-Mongolia’s history did articulate consolidated ideas pertaining to development directions and objectives for historical science in the Republic. Despite the ideological extremities had had most negative impacts on human resources and potentials of regional historical science, by the late 1930s there were a source base and theoretical/methodological tools generally compliant with Marxist-Leninist ideologies. All that helped P. Khaptaev, A. Okladnikov, F. Kudryavtsev and many others prepare generalized works on the history of Buryatia that have become classics of Russian historiography.

The article aims at shedding light on the history of the Buryat-Mongolian Scientific Committee: stages of its growth, contributions of its staff members in the organization of research and its implementation. Materials and methods. Both published and unpublished documents kept in the Center for Oriental Manuscripts and Xylographs of the Institute for Mongolian, Buddhist, and Tibetan Studies of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences and in the State Archive of the Republic of Buryatia were used as the main sources for the reconstruction of the past events while the data analysis was based on the main scientific principles of historicism, systematicity, and objectivity; the paper’s comprehensive approach was implemented via the method of system analysis, problem-chronological and historical-comparative methods, and local history. Results. The Buryat-Mongolian Scientific Committee (Buruchkom), established in July 1922, was designed to promote the national-cultural construction in Buryat-Mongolia while focusing on research and educational tasks. It had to begin its operation under far from favorable conditions, such as poor funding, illiteracy of the population, a shortage of personnel, and practically non-existent printing and publishing, especially in the Buryat-Mongolian language. Nevertheless, Buruchkom organized the studies of Buryat history, archaeology, spiritual and material culture, language and religion, and started field work as well. A significant portion of its activities was initially directed towards translation of educational and socio-political literature into the Buryat language, related terminological and lexical studies, preparation and publication of teaching materials, such as textbooks and teaching manuals for Buryat-Mongolian schools. The academic environment was enhanced with establishing a library and museum, which were of much relevance for future scientific work. Buruchkom’s final success was due to its fruitful cooperation with the central scientific institutions of the country and the Mongolian Scientific Committee. Conclusion. Despite that its team of researchers was not numerous, Buruchkom managed to organize, as well as conduct research projects in the fields of history, archaeology, ethnography, and linguistics. Having accomplished an important objective of laying the foundations of science in the region, it has now become a leading academic center of the Republic, known for its research in the arts and humanities.

The article aims to analyze the principal directions in the activities of Buryat-Mongolian State Institute of Culture (1929–1936) / Buryat-Mongolian State Institute of Language, Literature and History (1936–1944), the successor of the first scientific organization in Burya­tia — the Buryat-Mongolian Scientific Committee (1922–1929). It focuses on the achievements and problems in the organization and implementation of scientific research in the humanities in the 1930s. Materials. The sources used are unpublished documents of the Center for Oriental Manuscripts and Xylographs of the IMBT SB RAS, such as annual plans and reports on research work, minutes of meetings of the Directorate, expedition reports, presentations, abstracts and minutes of conferences, correspondence with various organizations and offices, and other materials that were instrumental in reconstructing the history of reorganizations of the scientific institute under study, in following the changes in its scientific program, and in showing its effectiveness and efficiency. Results. In the 1930–1940s, the studies in the field of history, language, literature, and arts of the Buryat-Mongolian people were the principal directions of research in the Institute. Archaeological expeditions were useful in drawing a general picture of the ancient history of Buryatia and the first cultural-historical schemes. Historians’ work resulted in publishing a significant number of documents devoted to the history of the Buryat-Mongolian people, the publications included materials on issues of the pre-revolutionary Buryat-Mongolia, the revolutionary movement and the Civil war period, culture, and education, including monographs on the history of Buryatia recognized today as classical scientific works. Within the framework of the established ideological attitudes, there was a discussion on controversial issues of the history of Buryat-Mongolia, which accepted the one-line nature of the historical process in Buryat studies. Thanks to the successes of Buryat linguistics, a reform of the Buryat-Mongolian writing was carried out, first based on the Latin, and then on the Cyrillic alphabet. The linguists of the Institute made a decisive contribution to the elaboration of the literary Buryat language, enriching its lexical resources and standardizing spelling and grammar. Collection, systematization and study of oral folk art and musical folklore, adding to the Manuscript Department of the Institute manuscripts and woodcuts in Tibetan, Mongolian, Buryat-Mongolian languages, as well as uligers, chronicles, and other historical and literary monuments, and translation work — these and other areas of scientific research shaped the development of the humanities in Buryatia in the 1930–1940s. Throughout the period of persecutions and repressions, despite personnel shortage and everyday hardships, the Institute’s team continued their work, conducting large-scale studies of the socio-political and economic history, the culture and art of Buryat-Mongolia.

The article focuses on one of the most interesting and under-researched topics in the history of banking in Russia, i. e. history of formation and operation of mutual credit societies. The focus is on identifying the specifics of creation of Verkhneudinsk mutual credit society (1911–1917), the first financial credit institution of its kind across the Western Transbaikalia, which was a strategically important transboundary region of the Russian Empire. Description of the initial phase of its activities, review of relationships with other banking institutions in the region, and the role of the society in the development of industry and trade in the region were determined. The research was based on sources published, i. e. Statutes, reports and balances of the Verkhneudinsk mutual credit society and unpublished materials of the State Archive of the Republic of Buryatia containing information on the activities of the financial institution. The authors’ work is based on the principles of history, science and objectivity, a comparative historical method, and a regional-oriented approach (taking into account the cross-border location of the object of research), which made it possible to analyze more fully the history of the Verkhneudinsk mutual credit society, created on July 1, 1911 and managed in a short period of time to integrate firmly into the financial market of Western Transbaikalia. An analysis of the organizational structure of the institution, the rights and obligations of its members, the main credit and financial transactions, and priority areas of activity allowed the authors to conclude that collegial management with the participation of people without special financial education, as well as the possibility of obtaining a loan only by members of the company is significantly limited the activities of the Mutual Credit Society. At the same time, financial closures and active participation in the management of all members have greatly reduced business risks. The research revealed that, despite the relatively small financial resources and tangible competition from the branches of Russo-Asian and Siberian Commercial Bank, the Verkhneudinsk credit society promoting entrepreneurial activity of citizens did not have only a positive impact on the economy of the Western Transbaikalia but also it contributed to the strengthening of Russian influence in the transboundary region of Inner Asia.