ФЕДЕРАЛЬНОЕ ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОЕ БЮДЖЕТНОЕ УЧРЕЖДЕНИЕ НАУКИ ИНСТИТУТ ВОСТОКОВЕДЕНИЯ РОССИЙСКОЙ АКАДЕМИИ НАУК ИГРА ПРЕС ТОЛОВ НА В О С ТОКЕ: ПОЛИТИЧЕСКИЙ МИФ И РЕА ЛЬНО С ТЬ Москва ИВ РАН 2023 УДК 93/94 ББК 63.3(5) И 70 Рекомендовано Ученым советом Института востоковедения РАН Ответственные редакторы: М. С. Круглова, канд. ист. наук, ФГБУН ИВ РАН Д. В. Дубровская, канд. ист. наук, ФГБУН ИВ РАН Рецензенты: Н. А. Филин, д-р ист. наук, ФГБОУ ВО «РГГУ» А. О. Захаров, д-р. ист. наук, ФГБУН ИВ РАН Составители: М. С. Круглова, канд. ист. наук, ФГБУН ИВ РАН Д. М. Тимохин, канд. ист. наук, ФГБУН ИВ РАН Коллектив авторов: С. И. Блюмхен, ИВ РАН, А. И. Волынский, ИЭ РАН, ГАУГН, И. П. Глушкова, д-р. ист. наук, ИВ РАН, С. В. Дмитриев, канд. ист. наук, ИВ РАН, Ю. И. Дробышев, канд. ист. наук, канд. биол. наук, ИВ РАН, М. С. Круглова, канд. ист. наук, ИВ РАН, С. Л. Кузьмин, д-р. ист. наук, ИВ РАН, М. А. Ласточкина, ГАУГН, Н. М. Моллеров, д-р. ист. наук, ТИГПИ, В. В. Прудников, канд. ист. наук, ИВ РАН, Е. Ю. Стабурова, д-р. ист. наук, Латвийский институт востоковедения, Д. М. Тимохин, канд. ист. наук, ИВ РАН И 70 Игра престолов на Востоке: Политический миф и реальность / отв. ред. М. С. Круглова, Д. В. Дубровская; Ин-т востоковедения РАН. – М.: ИВ РАН, 2023. – 304 с. ISBN 978-5-907671-26-3 Словно тень, миф, эта непокоренная часть сознания, сопровождал человечество на протяжении всей истории. Миф открывал тайну происхождения сущего, наделял историю мира и человека первопричинностью и базовым смыслом, ложился в основу моральных императивов. Политический миф — плод человеческих раздумий и стремлений — объяснял и легитимировал основы власти и социального порядка, на века, а порой на тысячелетия переживая создателей, раз за разом и эпоху за эпохой воспроизводя формы государственного и общественного бытия народов. Авторы монографии рассматривают отдельные сюжеты бытования политического мифа в странах Востока в различные исторические периоды. Китай, Япония, степи Центральной Азии и Индийский субконтинент, — всюду политический миф входил в ткань истории, становясь ее самостоятельным актором, а порой и творцом. ББК 63.3(5) © Коллектив авторов, 2023 © ФГБУН ИВ РАН, 2023 Оглавление Введение. Политический миф: создавая реальность .....................................................9 ЧАСТЬ 1. Легитимация власти в Китае и Японии ...........................................21 Глава 1. Становление политического мифа в Древнем Китае (на примере культа Неба) ..........................................................................................23 Глава 2. Два китайских исторических мифа: концепция «единства» и вопрос «династий» .................................................................................................83 Глава 3. Потерянный в переводе: Маттео Рипа и его роль в китайском «Споре о ритуалах» ...................................................................................................98 Глава 4. Антиманьчжурские политические мифы периода Цин: создание, типология, сюжеты и актуализация ......................................................113 Глава 5. Миф об истоках государства как источник легитимации новой власти в эпоху Мэйдзи .................................................................................135 ЧАСТЬ 2. Политическое мифотворчество от Индии до Монголии .............141 Глава 6. Неисчерпаемость бхакти. Дзана-баи как аргумент за приращение пространства Махараштры...........................................................143 Глава 7. Логика ориентализма и его воплощение в Индии XXI века Ахилья-баи как эталон и ролевая модель ..............................................................168 Глава 8. Политические мифы новейшей истории Тувы .......................................203 Глава 9. «Монголы» и «татары» в XIII в.: две грани одного мифа .....................217 ЧАСТЬ 3. Образ правителя у тюрок-сельджуков и норманнов ...................235 Глава 10. Хорезмшахи и Сельджуки: конструирование образа правителя и формирование преемственности власти.............................................................237 Глава 11. Тюрки-сельджуки как составляющая норманнского политического мифа на Востоке в эпоху Первого крестового похода................253 Некоторые выводы .........................................................................................................278 Resume .............................................................................................................................280 Список литературы .......................................................................................................286 Глава 2. Два китайских исторических мифа: концепция «единства» и вопрос «династий» С. В. Дмитриев, С. Л. Кузьмин Chapter 2. Two Chinese Historical Myths: The Concept of “Unity” and the Question of “Dynasties” Sergei V. Dmitriev, Sergius L. Kuzmin Each of us, living, studying, or visiting China (Zhongguo; 中國 — the Middle State), know wonderful and charming variety of this country. Almost every town or district enjoys its own dialect (which easily can be farther from official putonghua then one European language from another), food, traditional holidays, crafts, popular sayings and gods. Even now, this is not for tourists in most cases. More precisely, although local products and traditions are used for commerce, this commercial level normally exists and develops very separately from the level of living customs, which can be easily found on streets and in small markets. At the same time, all those people, who cannot in many cases communicate (in the full sense of the term) with people from neighboring township due to problems with dialects and have many funny stories about dumb and clumsy neighbors, are sure that they all are Chinese, “grandsons of the Yellow Emperor” (Huang-di zhi sun; 黃帝之孫), parts of one and inseparable nation. How can it be? Is it true that the unity is basic element of 83 Часть 1. Легитимация власти в Китае и Японии the Chinese civilization? Let’s try to analyze this. We will not dig too deep: all information we discuss is well-known to specialists, but we hope that even somehow simplistic comparative analysis of these data could give us detailed image which may be of some interest. Even the period of Neolithic cultures displayed a very high level of polycentric development. The still popular idea that Neolithic cultures in the middle current of the Huang He (often described as semi-unified, which is very doubtful) were the only ancestors of culture and civilization of China, is clearly false. From some decades specialists have known about brilliant findings at the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtse River, especially so called Liangzhu culture (良渚文化; 3400–2250 BC), formed by Austric speakers, around Taihu Lake, which shows clear signs of much higher development then contemporary Longshan Culture (龍山文化; 3000–1900 BC) and possibly represented the first state, or at least early state, in East Asia. Recently discovered site of Shimao (石峁; 2300–1800 BC) in Ordos (northern Shaanxi) which represents a city center of much more impressive size and fortifications, that everything we knew before in Neolithic East Asia, also pose many problems for traditional image of the Chinese history. For many centuries, or even millenniums, numerous centers of culture existed on the territory of modern China. Many of them were formed by non-Chinese peoples — even if we can say this, with all limitations, about the dwellers of settlements in the Huanghe area. Some of them may have been more developed, than areas which are considered as the “cradle of China”. From the oracle bones texts (jiaguwen; 甲骨文, 13th–11th centuries BC) we know that Shang (商; ca. 1600 – ca. 1046 BC), the first historically proved state in the Huanghe valley, indeed had a very centripetal and xenophobic worldview: in the center of the world they placed their capital, the Great City of Shang (Da yi Shang; 大邑商), which was surrounded by many tribes and polities (fang; 方), some of which could be vassals or allies, some could be enemies; but they definitely couldn’t have become Shang people or even equal to them later. From archeological data, we know about some Shang centers very far from the capital (История Китая… 2016: 481–484). Surprisingly, we almost don’t see them on oracle bones. But this is explicable: if some millenniums later archeologists will find journals published in Paris, Moscow or New York, they certainly would be sure that nothing happened outside of these cities. The system created by Zhou (周; ruled ca. 1046–256 BC), which was initially only one of tribes in the Shang proximity, was completely different. The subdued Shang people seems to have been much more numerous and 84 Глава 2. Два китайских исторических мифа: концепция «единства» и вопрос «династий» cultured than their conquerors; lands seized by the Zhou were too vast to rule them from one center; finally, in their war against Shang, Zhou had many allies, and it was too hard to explain them that now only Zhou are civilized people and others are no more than “barbarian” tribes. Redistribution of the conquered land, power and privileges between allies and relatives was inevitable. The state of Western Zhou (西周; ca. 1046–771 BC) was rather a confederation with the Zhou ruling house, but not Zhou people as ruling nation. The new state model was highly efficient at least at the level of cultural influences: territories, controlled by vassals of the wang (王; king) of Zhou, significantly exceeded the limits of the Shang State, and they expanded quickly. Any ruler, who accepts (even very formally) religious and political ideology of Zhou, could receive his place in the Zhou hierarchy. For many states, including non-Chinese ones, it was important to look like a part of the Zhou system, and many of them tried to receive formal title of the Zhou vassal (Дмитриев, Кузьмин, 2012: 5–19; 2015: 59–92). At first, it was based on religion: the wang of Zhou was considered the only Son of the Heaven (tianzi; 天子), who received a mighty support (magical force de; 德) from above, and his obedient vassals could receive some of this holy aid only from him. This idea, quite naive for the modern world, was persuasive at that time, and it worked well. That was why the Zhou period, when ethnicity and basic culture were not important for becoming a part of the Zhou confederation, was so successful for the rise of the Zhou culture influence, which quickly became accepted and shared by elites of very vast regions from present Sichuan and Zhejiang to Shaanxi and Liaoning. Texts of the Western Zhou are not very eloquent. It seems that every lineage cares mostly about itself, its land, and relations with the wang, but not about “confederation” (or “Zhou China”) as a whole. First attempts of understanding and explaining the common nature of states, united under the Zhou scepter, were made probably only in the time of the Eastern Zhou (771–256 BC), when real power of the wang of Zhou became insignificant. To that time, elites of all Zhou principalities, regardless of ethnicity of their subjects, shared the same Zhou culture. The Zhou confederation became much more closed and heterogeneous because of the wang power decline: new members were accepted rarely and only if they were usable allies against enemies, but not just expressing the will of becoming vassals to the king of Zhou. That was beginning of the formation of traditional Chinese worldview which described China as the only cultured nation surrounded by barbarians, who have or try to become good subjects of the Chinese ruler (and then became the Chinese), otherwise it is not necessary to treat them as people in the full sense of the word. Therefore, after centuries 85 Часть 1. Легитимация власти в Китае и Японии of openness and flexibility of the Western Zhou, xenophobic part of the Shang ideology somehow returned at a new level. The Eastern Zhou was basically period of appearance of some concepts aimed at description the region not only as a set of “vassals” to the wang of Zhou, but as a cultural unity. Many texts display massive emergence of some terms which are still in use, for example Tianxia 天下 or Zhongguo (中國). These words, clear for every Chinese now are not so easy for translation in their initial sense at those ancient times. Now there are two ways to say “China”, but in the time of Eastern Zhou it was not so simple. Tianxia (Under Heaven) denoted all states under the Son of the Heaven holy rule; so, all civilized states, states of the Zhou culture (Pines, 2002: 101–116). This concept might have been usable and comprehensible for elites of that time, but it was only an imaginary concept for common people of various principalities — and, of course, didn’t stop endless wars between these principalities, whose level of ferocity even gave the name to the last period of the Eastern Zhou history, the Warring States (Zhan guo; 戰國, 453–221 BC). Zhongguo was almost the same, but it was clearly plural, as it meant ‘Middle kingdoms’, and even ‘Middle cities’, because the most important idea derived from the character guo (國; state) contains an image of the walled city, just like in Greek πόλις. One more generalized term, designating an ethnic commonality zhuxia (諸夏; ‘all xia’; less often huaxia; 華 夏; ‘civilized xia’), related to the image of legendary first state of Xia, imaginary origin of China, also contains traces of this variability (see Beckwith, 2016: 231–248). All these terms were based also on the idea of juxtaposition of people of the Middle to the “barbarians” surrounding them, which are unable for wellorganized agriculture, self-organization or forming of state and city-building. Such xenophobic worldview had especially strong bases in the Huang He Valley, which is surrounded by very different lands, steppes on the north, deserts on the west, jungles, and swamps on the south. These different nature conditions make neighbor people also very different in very many aspects, it was easy for ancestors of the Chinese to believe that they are the only civilized people in the world, living in the only land which, thanks to Son of the Heaven holy influence, is good enough to live in. Because of an isolated position of the Huang He Valley, the first documented contact with similar civilizations, regarding state, bureaucracy, money and cities, had place only in the second part of the 2nd Century BC. In this way, it is too late to transform well-established point of view. This historical myth during many centuries manifested itself in the term Zhongguo which meant not the name of a certain state but only the designation of the middle, i.e., the most important (or the only real) state in the world. 86 Глава 2. Два китайских исторических мифа: концепция «единства» и вопрос «династий» The Initial (First) Emperor of the Qin, Qin Shi-huangdi (秦始皇帝; ruled as emperor in 221–210 BC), which unified a significant part of East Asia for the first time in history, understood very clearly that he did an absolutely unseen thing, unifying “all the Under Heaven” under his rule. That is why he took for himself a supreme title of huangdi, forged from two titles of mythical rulers from fabulous antiquity, ‘Three Augusts’ (san huang; 皇) and ‘Five Divine Rulers’ (wu di; 五帝). The new title, higher than the title of wang, was never used before by any mortal. The emperor also ordered to gather all the weapon of the empire, because it will be useless for people in the unified state, from now on spared from any wars or dangers. This was a brand for the start of a new epoch of eternal peace. It is explainable: before him China was not unified, and even the idea of unity of these lands, most probably, had not existed. The Qin Empire existed for a rather short time. Local elites were clearly against the unified rule and started the war against the new power to rebuild the heterogeneity of the “middle kingdoms”. But one of rebel generals, Liu Bang (劉邦; 256–195 BC, ruled in 202–195 BC) was smart and open enough to understand how many possibilities can receive any ruler who will remain the only one. It was a hard task: making his own Han (漢) Empire he had to conserve Qin institutions and innovations as soon as possible keeping this in secret to people who hated the Qin. This took the time of his life and lives of his sons and grandsons, but finally the Emperor Wu-di (武帝; 141–87 BC) became strong enough to achieve the process of forming of fully centralized state, create a new state ideology and religion and successfully extend empire’s borders, expanding solid imperial power in non-Chinese regions. Unification became reality. Very important part of his reform was creation of the new imperial ideology and imperial history. It was magnificently realized by the court annalist Sima Qian (司馬遷; ca. 145/135 – ca. 86 BC), who for the first time managed to write history of the whole China from the beginning to his time, “Records of the historiographer” (Shi ji 史記)59. For any reader of Sima Qian’s work it was clear that China was united at least from the fabulous time of the Yellow Emperor Huang-di (黃帝), and struggles of the Eastern Zhou time were only a sad exclusion from the rule. Sima Qian was an enthusiast of unified China (even also he was born after less than 40 years after this unification has become real), as most educated people in China from that time. 59 Russians are lucky to have the full translation of so important text, mainly made by Rudolf Vyatkin and published in 2010. It was first full translation into European language (second one was French translation published in 2015). 87 Часть 1. Легитимация власти в Китае и Японии The Han Empire, including short Wang Mang (王莽) interregnum (202 BC – 220 AC), ruled enough to lay the foundations of almost all basic concepts of the unitary Chinese culture. As a result, people with very different ethnic roots, spoken many languages, living in different natural conditions, since then considered themselves as the Chinese, as subjects of one emperor, shared a common set of cultural concepts, and had common actual and (which is often more important) mythological history (see: Дмитриев, Кузьмин, 2012: 5–19; 2014: 5–17; 2015: 59–92). It was even more effective, because Chinese governments almost never asked their people to sacrifice their local identity to the idea of one and the only China. At some level you can speak your dialect and make jokes about peoples from neighboring provinces, you can promote your own province as a cradle of Chinese civilization or some of its part — these are not prohibited. But you just cannot forget that at the highest level you all are Chinese. This situation reminds the situation in modern China’s economy: it is capitalist economy at lower level and rather state-controlled at the higher, official level; market economy paradoxically coexists with communist party ideology; propaganda of traditional culture and values with Marxist doctrine. For everybody except for Chinese this looks strange and even impossible, but it is quite normal for China. Early empires not only achieved some success in uniting China politically for the first time. They created a very influential social group, bureaucracy, which in China was almost the same as intellectual elite, which shared the same culture, same education, same professional language60, and was deeply interested in conserving this construct of unified China, in which they had much more opportunities then in separate Chinese states. They created the historical myth of unified China and very successfully indoctrinate lower-level populations, but without demolishing their local differences at the same time. This point of view became one of the basic concepts of Chinese elites, which was strong enough to survive centuries of separation and alien rule, and again and again rebuild the ‘Chinese empire’ without having unified people or culture. One of the main components in the historical myth of eternal continuation of power in China, despite any obstacles or separations, is a very well elaborated concept of dai or chao, which are often translated into Western languages as ‘dynasties’. 60 It was the only group in China who had a common language for them, a sort of professional pidgin based on a dialect of the capital; in that way the northern group of dialects of the modern Chinese now is called guanhua (官話) — “language of bureaucrats”, which forms the term “Mandarin Chinese”, in English. 88 Глава 2. Два китайских исторических мифа: концепция «единства» и вопрос «династий» What are these dynasties? In Europe this is a notion for rulers from one family (sometimes adopting is possible), replacing one another; existence of one ruling dynasty does not exclude simultaneous existence of others in different states on different thrones. Dynasty can theoretically exist without power of rule (in exile, for example). However, in China it is more complicated. Like in Europe, normal Chinese “dynasty” is a line of rulers from one familial line, but this is the only similarity. Firstly, Chinese dynasty can only be ruling house; without ruling, it does not exist; secondly, in normal situation only one “dynasty” can exist in the same period because the head of “dynasty” is the emperor, the only Son of the Heaven, who a priori could not have any “royal brothers” belonging to other dynasties. The emperor rules by the Mandate of Heaven — tian ming (天命), a Western Zhou concept deeply related to the idea of the ruler as a mediator between the Heaven and Earth (detailed analysis of the emperor’s power sacralization in China see in Попова, 2005: 364–386; see also Sacred Mandates, 2018). Such mandate can be received or lost due to ruler’s behavior. In reality, in many periods many rulers who governed at the same time, pretended to be the only Son of the Heaven, but Chinese historiography cared mostly of right image of a period than of reliable description of it, and always tried to choose the only “genuine” emperor and label others as usurpers or pretenders, although often it took many years to understand which pretender will win annalists’ sympathies for proclaiming the ‘true ruler’. For this worldview, the line of emperors (and “dynasties”) should not be interrupted. Following this rule, Chinese historiographers were obligated sometimes to recognize as emperors very weak, even non-Chinese rulers, for example, of Turkic Shato families, which created in northern China “empires” of the Later Tang (後唐; 923–936), Later Jin (後晉; 936–946) and Later Han (後唐; 946–950). These were small unstable states which were clearly much less impressive than many Chinese states in the South at the same period. But these Turks controlled the imperial capital city of the Tang epoch, and it was enough for historiographers for accepting their imperial claims. The only period for which Chinese historiography accepts the coexistence of “dynasties” in the same time is the epoch of the Song (宋) Empire (960–1279), which coexisted with the Kitan Great Liao (大遼) Empire (916–1125) and then with the Jurchen Great Jin (大金) Empire (1125–1234), which replaced previous one. Probably the only cause why they were accepted was the will of Mongol emperors (more precisely, the last one, Toghon Temur, 1320–1370, ruled in 1333–1370). He patronized compilation of official histories and 89 Часть 1. Легитимация власти в Китае и Японии ordered to make three of them, Song, Liao and Jin. The “History of Liao” and the “History of Jin” were finished in 1344, “History of Song” (Song shi) in 1345. All of them were prepared under the supervision of Toqtoh (Tuo-tuo; 脫脫)， 1314–1356; Big Chinese… 1994: 236, 240, 242). It was important for Mongols to show that presence of the non-Chinese on the imperial throne is normal and acceptable situation. Without this “Mongol invasion” Chinese historiography most probably would not make such exclusions from rules, and the only “dynasty” for those times could be the Song. Now Chinese history could easily be presented as a history of one and the only state with “dynasties” changing one another on the emperor’s throne. But deeper analysis revealed that it is clearly false idea, although it has been very useful for Chinese governments in all times. In fact, the region of East Asia during a biggest part of its history was not united politically; it was never homogenous ethnically or linguistically. The words dai or chao, which we usually translate as “dynasty”, have nothing etymologically common with the Western meaning of “dynasty”. For dai, the closest etymology should be “to replace” (Ricci, 2001, № 10265, vol. 5: 727–728), the main idea of the concept is that ruling houses replace one another following the doctrine of the Mandate of the Heaven. The term is mostly used for ancient history of the Three Dynasties (San dai; 三代), Xia, Shang and Zhou, whose history was compiled when their destiny was already known or made up. For chao, which is strongly related with the palace ritual (“morning audience”) (Ricci, 2001, № 455, vol. 1: 235), good variant for the translation can be “[royal/imperial] court” (which would be a better translation of Chinese term, than “dynasty” which is in use now). Variant, chosen in western languages, is probably influenced by the doctrine of the history of Ancient Egypt ruled by more than thirty successive “dynasties” – a scheme designed by Manetho (3rd century BC), but somehow not perfect for Egypt, too. Anyhow, this interpretation is clearly imprecise, making Chinese “dynasties” something like Western ones. At the same time, we could easily find some Chinese terms for the idea of ruling house, something like wangjia (王家) royal family (even something shorter, just jia — “family”) in some contexts. All Chinese dynasties (just like Western ones) did not use their exact family names as designations for their empires: the dynasty of Liu (劉) ruled in the Han Empire, the dynasty of Li 李 in the Tang Empire etc. There is one more point because we should not apply the word “dynasty” to Chinese empires. The “Han dynasty” is a notion of the same level of fallacy as the “French dynasty” or the “Roman dynasty”. What we are accustomed to call “dynasties of China”, 90 Глава 2. Два китайских исторических мифа: концепция «единства» и вопрос «династий» are names of different Chinese and non-Chinese states or regimes whose rulers received (or pretended to receive) the imperial title, or, in other cases, royal title: before the Qin Empire, some rulers of the Warring States period proclaimed themselves kings and somehow usurped the sacred right reserved to their Zhou sovereigns. The fact that we are well accustomed to this wrong application of the term “dynasty” to Chinese dai and chao does not make this application less fallacious. Therefore, names of empires are not names of their dynasties: the Qin (秦) State (ruled by Ying (贏) dynasty) conquered in 221 BC all other Chinese states and became the Qin Empire; the King of Hanzhong (漢中; Han-wang; 漢王) Liu Bang conquered whole the region and became the emperor of the Han Empire etc. The concept of geographic terms as a source for naming new empires was changed only with the Yuan (元)61. This name was chosen for not the notion of the primary “princedom” or “fief” of its founder but the good-sounding term “Ancient” or “Initial” (Yuan), just as its “barbarian” precursor, the “Golden” (Jin) Empire of Jurchens (which Chinese name was Da Jin guo 大金國), only translated as the Jurchen Anchun gurun, the Golden State62). Zhu Yuanzhang (朱元璋; 1328–1398, ruled: 1368–1398), who expelled Mongols and rebuilt the Chinese (that time Ming) empire, paradoxically, used the same “barbarian” rule, making his ‘Great Bright’ — Da Ming (大明) Empire; Manchu did the same with their Da Qing (Great Pure) Empire. We see not a consecutive line of dynasties changing one another on the Chinese throne, but different states fighting in East Asia, some of which were non-Chinese; rulers of some of them received the Son of Heaven title proclaiming their empires ‘Middle State’, the main state in the world.In general, the “Chinese dynasty” (if we use this term) is a name of a state by the period of reign of one family that has adopted the Chinese concept of monarchic power; it is such a state which includes a part of China, or it contains China as a whole, or it is just China, or a part of it that was proclaimed to be a state, or it is a state adjacent to China’s borders whose ruler, having proclaimed himself the emperor, claimed for the Chinese throne (Kuzmin, 2011: 469). 61 62 Even the case of a short-lived Xin Empire (9–23 AD) of Wang Mang, which is often explained as related to his maniacal thrust to reform (xin; 新; “new”), wasn’t an exclusion: most probably, the state was named after Xindu (新都), a ‘marquisate’ granted to Wang Mang in 16th BC, perfectly following the traditional way. Besides, valley of the “Golden River”, Anchuhu, a tributary of the Sungari, was a cradle of the Jurchen State; so very probably this name of the state was also chosen by geographical principle, just like Chinese name of the Kitan state, and Liao after the Liaohe (遼河), flowing in Kitan native lands. 91 Часть 1. Легитимация власти в Китае и Японии Chinese historians preferred to accept as “dynasties” (or “imperial courts”) mostly ethnic Chinese lineages (or lineages considered as Chinese). Exceptions were rare. The Yuan and the Qing empires established by Mongols and Manchus managed to subdue the whole China and, consequently, nothing remained to the Chinese historians as to recognize them as legitimate, although “barbaric” imperial lineages. Two more “foreign dynasties” have ruled only in Northern China: the Liao of Kitans and the Jin of Jurchens. We already noted these cases and their origins, related to Mongol attempts of using historiography for making their positions in China more stable. As a result, in the traditional Chinese historiography China does not look like a part of states which have conquered it but, instead, inside China one “dynasty” replaced another and one Son of the Heaven replaced another. Even foreign conquerors were satisfied with such situation: first, it alleviated the control over their Chinese subjects who in each of such states composed a vast majority, and second, within the framework of the region around China the title of emperor of the “main state in the world” was among the most desirable. At the same time, their own concepts of power could have different origins (see Доронин, 1995; Kuzmin, 2011; Dmitriev and Kuzmin, 2015, for details). Genghis Khan and his descendants considered that whole world should submit to them. This could be perceived as an analogy to the traditional Chinese worldview because the Great Khan or Emperor was positioned as the only legitimate ruler of the Universe. However, Mongols meant submission to their Great Khan instead of “mollification of barbarians” and acculturating influence of the Middle State: Mongols were not especially interested in “mongolization” of conquered lands and did not try to convert conquered peoples in their faith; quite opposite, they were remarkably tolerant and perceptive for foreign beliefs. So, their basic concept of world rule was not the Chinese one. In 1271, grandson of Genghis Khan, the Great Khan Khublai (1215–1294, ruled 1260–1294), who was much more influenced by his Chinese advisers, has issued the decree according to which the Great Mongol State (or Great Mongolian People, Yeke Mongol Ulus) from now on was called on the Chinese manner “the Great Initial” (Chin. Da Yuan; 大元), which is considered by Chinese historians as one of legitimate “dynasties” of China. He also took Chinese imperial title for himself, and in 1266 granted it to his ancestors, even to Genghis Khan’s father, who certainly did not consider himself as an emperor of China. The text of this decree was written in Chinese and, probably, has not been proclaimed in other Genghisid principalities, so they continued to consider 92 Глава 2. Два китайских исторических мифа: концепция «единства» и вопрос «династий» themselves as parts of the Great Mongol State and not parts of the “Chinese Yuan empire”. Nevertheless, the decree of the Great Khan was mandatory for all his subjects. Thus, if we shall equate the Great Yuan State with China (as was — and still is — made by Chinese and many other historians), we should conclude that borders of China have reached Hungary and Palestine, and the whole Great Mongol Empire, including Russia, Afghanistan, Iran, some European and other countries, was China. Such view may be reasonable for the Chinese, but very strange for other peoples. Mongolian khans of other principalities (Mo. ulus) accepted the seniority of great khans by old Mongolian tradition, based on the blood legacy from Genghis Khan. According to this concept, it was the only royal legacy. The Chinese accepted authority of Yuan emperors as the next “dynasty” of the Sons of the Heaven received the mandate of Heaven to rule in the Middle State. But from the Mongolian point of view, the Yuan Empire up to the end remained the Mongol state, which included China together with other territories. Special study of Mongolian, Chinese and other sources revealed that the Mongols who ruled China did not regard their dynasty as a successor of the Song or Jin, and the name Da Yuan, being widely used, was not understood as denoting only the domain of Khublai Khan and his successors. For them, Da Yuan was a Chinese equivalent of Yeke Mongol Ulus, i.e., the whole empire. The territory and people under direct rule of the Great Khan (i.e., his domain) was called by the Mongols as Qa’an Ulus, i.e., the State (or People) of the Great Khan. It was a part of the Great Mongol State together with other khanates (uluses: Golden Horde, Ilkhanate, Ulus of Chagataids), which did not impede the Chinese viewing Da Yuan as a “dynasty”, restoring the chain of unified imperial tradition of the Yuan, Tang and Song (Kim, 2015: 300–301). The Manchus have accepted some important components of the Chinese worldview. After the conquest of China, declarations of these concepts aimed at legitimization of their rule for the Han, the most numerous people in their empire. The Manchus sought legitimization among the Han people also using cultural history and political legacy. The first Qing Emperor in Beijing, Fulin (ruled in 1643–1661, after 1644 also with Chinese imperial title huangdi added to Mongol title Bogdo Khan, i.e., the Holy or Great Khan), although attracted by Buddhism, in public (Chinese) positioned himself mainly as a Confucian emperor. The same is true for emperors ruled after him. At the same time, these emperors legitimized themselves in the eyes of the Mongols claiming their succession from the Genghis Khan’s clan, in the eyes of Tibetans using the ‘priest — patron’ relations between the emperors and higher lamas of Tibetan 93 Часть 1. Легитимация власти в Китае и Японии Buddhism (Кузьмин, 2012: 261–273). The Manchus accepted their state’s designation in Chinese manner. Official Chinese name of their empire was the Great Pure State (Da Qing guo). It should be noted that the Chinese term was phonetically presented also in the Manchu name Dai Chin gurun, so the Chinese name was the main one in some sense. Until 1644, the Qing court designated China as the State of the Chinese (Han) (Ma. Nikan gurun), or the State of the Chinese (Han) Great Ming (Ma. Nikan-i Daiming-i gurun). Since the seizure of Beijing in 1644, the Manchus began to apply the term Middle State (Ma. Dulimbai gurun) to their empire which included subdued Han and nonHan lands (Zhao, 2006, p. 5, 11). Detailed study of Chinese documents of the 17th–20th centuries revealed that the usage of the word Zhongguo is in one row with many other unofficial terms (Zhao, 2006: 6–10). Zhongguo clearly was not specifically related to the Chinese nation, but to the concept of the only civilized state in the world63, borrowed by Manchu from Chinese, but without any ethnic component. This is not surprising, because the Qing Empire had been founded by the Manchu and received its name outside of China (that time, the Ming Empire). In 1636, Manchu state adopted the name Qing (Pure), and this meant an opposition to the neighboring Ming (Bright). During some time both states coexisted. As a result of conquest, China had been incorporated into foreign state, the Manchu Qing Empire. The source of central power there originated from outside of China. Moreover: the Qing Empire, claimed to be the main state (i.e., Zhongguo, China) by the Manchu emperors, coexisted with other states claimed to have been also Chinas. First time after its proclamation it coexisted with the Chinese (Han) Ming Empire. After the Manchu Qing Empire conquered the Ming capital city of Beijing (in 1644), the Manchu Emperor Fulin was enthroned there (in the second time, as the Chinese huangdi), and since then the Qing Empire claimed to rule China. But reality was somewhat different. Some lands of the Ming China still were to be conquered, and they nominally subordinated to the last members of the Ming dynasty. Only in 1659 Zhu Yulang (朱由榔; 1623–1662, ruled after 1646), the last emperor of so-called Southern Ming64, had lost his control over any Chinese territories and flee to Burma: in 1662 he was delivered to the Manchus and strangled in Guanzhou in 1673, the Qing Emperor Xuanye (玄燁; 63 64 This is very characteristic for universalist empires, e.g., the Byzantine Empire. Of course, Zhu Yulang considered himself the ruler of the Ming Empire and not the Southern Ming ruler: the latter term was elaborated by Chinese historiographers who accepted that after 1644 legitimate rule was in the hands of Manchu emperors, so all regimes considered themselves continuation of the Ming Empire had to be named differently. 94 Глава 2. Два китайских исторических мифа: концепция «единства» и вопрос «династий» 1654–1722, ruled after 1661) issued a decree dissolving the troops subordinate to the three governors of the southern provinces, Ming renegade generals. This caused one of them, Wu Sangui (吳三桂; 1612–1678), who initially invited Manchus into China and then destroyed Southern Ming, to revolt. In 1678, he proclaimed himself emperor of the Great Zhou; 大周, thereby restoring the independence of the Chinese State. Only in the early 1680s, Manchus defeated the troops of the grandson of Wu Sangui and joined this “China” to their “China”. Taiwan was also somehow an independent Chinese territory, where the power of the Manchus was established only in 1683 (Kuzmin, 2011: 44–45, 464). Thus, some of Middle Kingdoms were created by the Han rulers; others by “foreign dynasties”, who seized Chinese (Han) territory in full or in part. Some neighbours of China, who have not conquered China or its parts, also used this terminology. In 1805, the emperor of Vietnam proclaimed his state Trung quốc, i.e. Zhongguo, and non-Vietnamese peoples “barbarians” (Woodside, 1988, p. 18-19). For Japan the term Chugoku (Middle State, i.e. Zhongguo, together with “middle court”, “middle culture”) was used by Confucian writer Yamaga Soko (1622–1685). He used these terms because he considered that the “path of the sage” is properly observed only in Japan (Михайлова, 1989, p. 44). At present, western region on Honshu Island is called Chugoku due to its “middle” geographic position. Japanese characters for this region’s name 中国 are the same as for Zhongguo. There are also some analogies in the West. They are allusions to the Roman Empire which, like the Middle Kingdom, claimed universalism, “pacification” and “acculturation of barbarians”. Her successor was Byzantium, whose correct name was Βασιλεία Ῥωμαίων – Monarchy of the Romans. Other states also made claims to this continuity, the Holy Roman Empire and pre-revolutionary Russia, especially in the 16th–17th centuries, when the Third Rome was considered the state-forming concept. The Third Rome concept has also been used sometimes in Italy since the 19th Century. The Austrian Empire claimed succession from the Holy Roman Empire, which existed before 1806. The same applies to the German Empire created in 1871. Later, the term “Third Empire” (Drittes Reich) in Nazi Germany meant succession from the German Empire (“Second Empire” – Zweites Reich). Claims to the Roman imperial succession were also manifested in personal titles. The Ottoman Sultan Mehmet II, who captured Constantinople (in 1453), took the title Kayser-i Rum (Caesar of Rome). Similar titles were taken by other rulers: the King Simeon I of Bulgaria (913, “emperor of the Bulgarians and 95 Часть 1. Легитимация власти в Китае и Японии Romans”), Serbian King Stefan Uroš IV Dušan (1345, “emperor of the Serbs and Romans”). The heir to the Byzantine throne, Andreas Palaiologos, ceded the rights to this throne to the French King Charles VIII (1494) and after the latter’s death, to Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile (1502). These analogues indicate that different powers in the West claimed succession and/or designation of the “main state” in the world, and, similarly to the situation in East Asia, they represented different states, some of whose have no historical succession from the initial “main state”. To the beginning of the 20th century, nationalism became the driving force in international relations. The traditional sinocentric system had failed due to collision of the Qing Empire with the Western powers. For the sake of retention the Empire, the Cixi (慈禧; 1835–1908, regent after 1861) regime adopted in the first years of 20th Century a new policy towards assimilation of the “frontier peoples” by the Han, which meant cessation of the conditions behind old relations of the Qing with Mongolia and Tibet. This resulted in proclamations of independence of these states and the rise of national movements (see Kuzmin, 2012: 113–143; Кузьмин, 2012: 261–273; 2019: 142–166). The driving force of the republicans in their fight against the Qing Empire was Han nationalism and anti-Manchu sentiment. Dr. Sun Yatsen; 孫中山 (1866– 1925) in his declaration at assuming the post of the temporary President of the Republic of China stated the necessity of complete elimination of the remains of autocracy (i.e. Manchu rule); in the message at his renunciation of this post near the tomb of the Ming founder Zhu Yuanzhang he said on the establishment of a free republic and elimination of the strong enemy of the nation, i.e. Manchus (Giles, 1912; Сунь Ятсен, 1985: 121–123; Сидихменов, 1985: 288-289). Thus, we can see that foreign conquerors used the Zhou concept of Zhongguo as a union of subjects of the Son of the Heaven in its non-ethnical dimension. It was a good concept for such multinational empires, whose bitterest enemy was Chinese nationalism. At the same time, when the Chinese (Han) used the same concept, they implied that if it looks like the Zhou concept, it must be Chinese, because they considered all these empires as the continuation of an everlasting Chinese Empire, i.e., the Han state, ruled by the Han or by “barbarians”. Therefore, we often find completely different explanations of the same terms and concepts by peoples from different states of Inner Asia. At a certain time, it composed the strength of such empires (e.g., multi-faceted legitimization of the Qing for different peoples), but some time afterwards it became a sign of lack of contacts and communications between different communities and made impact into empire’s collapse. 96 Список литературы Адамов Е. А. (2007). Урянхайский вопрос при царском и Временном правительствах. Кызыл: КЦО Аныяк. 72 с. Адиб Х. (2003). К истории бутофорских революций. Документальна хроника. Восток (1). С. 198–200. ал-Карши Дж. (2005). ал-Мулхакат би-с-сурах. История Казахстана в персидских источниках. Т. I. Алматы: Дайк-Пресс. ал-Хусайни Садр ад-Дин ‘Али (1980). Ахбар ад-Даулат ас-Селджукиййа (Зубдат ат-таварих фи ахбар ал-умара ва-л-мулук ас-селджукиййа) («Сообщения о Сельджукском государстве». «Сливки летописей, сообщающих о сельджукских эмирах и государях»). М.: Востлит. Андерсон Б. (2016). Воображаемые сообщества. Размышления об истоках и распространении национализма. Пер. с англ. В. Николаева; вступ. ст. С. П. Баньковской. М.: Кучково поле. 416 с. Антонова К. А., Гольдберг Н. М., Осипов А. М. (отв. ред.) (1961). Новая история Индии. М.: Востлит. ан-Насави (1973). Жизнеописание султана Джалал ад-Дина Манкбурны. М., 1973. Анонимный грузинский «Хронограф» XIV века. Вып. I. Текст / Пер. Г. В. Цулая. М.: [Б. и.], 2005. 162 с. Аранчын Ю. Л. (1957). Историческое значение присоединения Тувы к России в 1914 г. Ученые записки ТНИИЯЛИ. Кызыл (2). С. 142–158. Аранчын Ю. Л. (1982). Исторический путь тувинского народа к социализму. Новосибирск: Наука. 338 с. Аранчын Ю. Л. (1984). К вопросу о периодизации истории Тувы переходного периода от феодализма к социализму. Проблемы истории Тувы. Кызыл: Тув. книжн. издво. С. 3–41. Арапов А. В. (2005). «Науба» («набат») Искандара. Moziydan sado (Эхо истории) (1). С. 16–19. Бакрāн Мух̣аммад ибн Наджӣб (1960). Джахāн-нāме (Книга о мире). М.: Наука, ГРВЛ. Банзаров Д. (1997). О происхождении слова монгол. Доржи Банзаров. Собрание сочинений. Улан-Удэ: БНЦ СО РАН. С. 94–97. Барт Р. (2003). Система Моды. Статьи по семиотике культуры. М. Барт Р. (2008). Мифологии. Пер. с фр., вступ. ст. и коммент. С. Зенкина. М.: Академический Проект. 351 с. Бартольд В. В. (1963). Туркестан в эпоху монгольского нашествия. Бартольд В. В. Сочинения. М.: Наука. Т. I. Туркестан в эпоху монгольского нашествия. С. 45–597. Бергер П., Лукман Т. (1995). Социальное конструирование реальности: Трактат по социологии знания. Пер. с англ. Е. Руткевич. М.: Academia-Центр; Медиум. 323 с. Бердяев Н. (2016). Смысл истории. СПб: Азбука-Классика. 254 с. 286 Билэгт Л. (2007). Раннемонгольские племена (этногенетические изыскания на основе устной истории). Улаанбаатар, 2007. 223 с. Билэгт Л. (2003). Шивэйцы и монголы. Угсаатан судлал. T. XV. Fasc. 4. Улаанбаатар. С. 25–40. Блюмхен С. И. (1988). Опыт реконструкции семантики «Книги перемен». Общество и государство в Китае. Ч. I. М.: ИВ РАН. С. 33–36. Блюмхен С. И. (1998). Дэ и триграммы «И цзина». От магической силы к моральному императиву. Категория «дэ» в китайской культуре. Под ред. Л. Н. Борох, А. И. Кобзева. М.: Востлит. С. 118–147. Блюмхен С. И. (2012). Космологические аспекты мифов о «совершенномудрых правителях». Ч. I: Миф о Гуне и Юе. Общество и государство в Китае. Ч. 3. М.: ИВ РАН. С. 194–224. Блюмхен С. И. (2013). Космологические аспекты мифов о «совершенномудрых правителях». Ч. II: Миф о Гуне и Юе в эпоху Шан. Общество и государство в Китае. Ч. 1. М.: ИВ РАН. С. 336–381. Блюмхен С. И. (2014). Миф о Куа-фу и китайские представления о Мировом древе. В пути за Китайскую стену. К 60-тилетию А. И. Кобзева. М.: ИВ РАН. С. 196–206. Блюмхен С. И. (2015). Скрытые смыслы Шу-цзина: разговор Цзу И с Чжоу-синем в главе Си-бо кань Ли. Общество и государство в Китае. Т. XLV. Ч. 1. М.: ИВ РАН. С. 602–610. Блюмхен С. И. (2016а). О «реформе Му-вана»: причины, содержание, результаты. Общество и государство в Китае. Т. XLVI. Ч. 1. М.: ИВ РАН. С. 390–418. Блюмхен С. И. (2016б). У истоков чжоуской идеологии: мифы о Красной птице и Хоу Цзи. Общество и государство в Китае. Т. XLVI. Ч. 1. М.: ИВ РАН. С. 19–438. Блюмхен С. И. (2018). Герменевтика имен и образов: Бо И-као, Бо-и и Шу-ци. Общество и государство в Китае. Т. XLVIII. Ч. 1. М.: ИВ РАН. С. 133–161. Блюмхен С. И. (2019а). Скрытые смыслы «Шу-цзина»: ответ Чжоу-синя на упреки Цзу И в главе «Си-бо кань Ли». Общество и государство в Китае. Т. XLIX. Ч. 1. М.: ИВ РАН. С. 37–45. Блюмхен С. И. (2019б). Герменевтика имен и образов: об именах и прозвищах шанского вана Ди-синя. Общество и государство в Китае. Т. XLIX. Ч. 1. М.: ИВ РАН. С. 110–123. Бойцов М. (2010). Что такое потестарная ималогия. Бойцов М. А., Успенский Ф. Б. (отв. ред.). Власть и образ. Очерки потестарной имагологии. СПб.: Алетея. Борох Л. Н. (1966). Антиманьчжурские идеи первых китайских буржуазных революционеров (о показаниях Лу Хаодуна). Маньчжурское владычество в Китае. М.: ГРВЛ Наука. С. 333–362. Буниятов З. М. (1986). Государство Хорезмшахов-Ануштегинидов, 1097–1231. М.: Наука. Бунтаро Нисино (西野 文太郎). URL: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/西野文太郎 (03.05.2022). Валлерстайн И. (2006). Существует ли в действительности Индия. Пер. с англ. А. Фисуна. Логос. 56(5). С. 3–8. Васильев Л. С. (1983). Проблемы генезиса китайского государства. М.: ГРВЛ. Васильев Л. С. (1995). Древний Китай: в 3 т. Т. 1. Предыстория, Шан-Инь, Западное Чжоу (до VIII в. до н. э.). М.: Востлит. Великая революция и Гражданская война в России в «восточном измерении (2020). М.: ИВ РАН. 336 с. Винсент из Бове (2006). Историческое зерцало / Пер. Н. Горелова. Книга странствий. СПб.: Азбука-классика. С. 79–116. 287 Гайтон (2006). Цветник историй земель Востока / Пер. Н. Горелова. Книга странствий. СПб.: Азбука-классика. С. 211–274. Генис В. Л. (2002). Борьба вокруг реформ в Бухаре в 1917 г. Вопросы истории (3). С. 18–36. Георгиевский С. М. (1885). Первый период китайской истории (до императора Циньши Хуан-ди). СПб. Гильом де Рубрук (1997). Путешествие в Восточные страны. Путешествия в восточные страны. М.: Мысль. С. 86–189. Глушкова И. П. (2000). Индийское паломничество. Метафора движения и движение метафоры. М.: Научный мир. Глушкова И. П. (2004а). Боги здесь и сейчас. Индусская мифология как инструмент создания североиндийской идентичности. Восток-Oriens (1). C. 5–27. Глушкова И. П. (2004б) Боги здесь и сейчас. Индусская мифология как инструмент создания североиндийской идентичности. Восток-Oriens (2). С. 28–34. Глушкова И. П. (2008а). Язык мой – враг твой. Борьба и тяжба за маратхиязычные земли. Глушкова И. П. (состав., отв. ред.). Язык до Индии доведет. Памяти А. Т. Аксёнова. М.: Востлит. С. 426–54. Глушкова И. П. (2008б). Подвижность и подвижничество. Теория и практика тиртха-ятры. М.: Наталис. Глушкова И. П. (2012). Следы и наследие. Извлечение посмертных смыслов. Глушкова И. П. (рук. проекта, науч. ред.) Смерть в Махараштре. Воображение, восприятие, воплощение. М.: Наталис. С. 49–113. Глушкова И. П. (2015). Кругооборот новостей и отложенное управление. Почтовая политика при дворе Ахилья-баи Холкар (прав. 1767–1795) в Махешваре. Глушкова И. П. (рук. проекта), Сидорова С. Е. (отв. ред.). Под небом Южной Азии. Движение и пространство: парадигма мобильности и поиски смыслов за пределами статичности. М.: Наука; Востлит. Глушкова И. П. (2016а). Стратегия присвоения пространства и контроля над владениями. Глушкова И. П. (рук. проекта), Бочковская А. В. (отв. ред.). Под небом Южной Азии. Территория и принадлежность: геополитическое конструирование и субъектность восприятия обитаемых пространств. М.: Наука; Востлит. Глушкова И. П. (2016б). Два-в-одном: административно-территориальный казус маратхского княжества (Девас) в центре Индии. Глушкова И. П. (рук. проекта), Бочковская А. В. (отв. ред.). Под небом Южной Азии. Территория и принадлежность: геополитическое конструирование и субъектность восприятия обитаемых пространств. М.: Наука; Востлит. Глушкова И. П. (2016в). «Путешествующий взгляд» контролирующего ока: ландшафт Раджпутаны в преддверии падения Маратхской конфедерации. Глушкова И. П. (рук. проекта), Бочковская А. В. (отв. ред.). Под небом Южной Азии. Территория и принадлежность: геополитическое конструирование и субъектность восприятия обитаемых пространств. М.: Наука; Востлит. Глушкова И. П. (2017а). От «худшего» к «лучшему»: методики понижения и повышения статусного ранга (дхарский коллаж). Глушкова И. П. (рук. проекта), Ванина Е. Ю. (отв. ред.). Под небом Южной Азии. Хула и хвала: коммуникативные модальности исторического и культурного своеобразия. М.: Наука; Востлит. Глушкова И. П. (2017б) — «Коммуникативный разлом, или Масштабы социального дисбаланса в социальном портретировании (индорский кейс-стади)». Глушкова И. П. (рук. проекта), Ванина Е. Ю. (отв. ред.). Под небом Южной Азии. Хула и хвала: коммуникативные модальности исторического и культурного своеобразия. М.: Наука; Востлит. 288 Глушкова И. П. (2018). Дзана-баи: из служанок в богини. Новые тенденции современного индуизма. Восток (Oriens). (5). С. 113–24. Глушкова И. П. (2021). Не вообще, а в частности. Глушкова И. П. (рук. проекта, отв. ред.). Под небом Южной Азии. Стыд и гордость: введение в стандарты и практики эмоций. М.: ИДВ РАН–Востлит. С. 854–885. Голосовкер Я. Э. (1987). Логика мифа. М.: ГРВЛ; Наука. Горский В. (1852). О происхождении родоначальника ныне царствующей в Китае Династии Цинъ и имени народа Маньчжу. Труды членов Российской духовной миссии в Пекине. СПб. Т. 1. С. 189–246. Гребнев Г. А. (2016). Эволюция памяти о чжоуском завоевании Шан на примере одного текста. Восток (Oriens). № 4. С. 76–103. Да и цзюэ ми лу (Записи о великой правде, просвещающей заблудших) (1730). Б. м., (1–4). (http://gmzm.org/bbooks/%E7%BA%AA%E4%BC%A0/%E5%A4%A7%E4%B9%89 %E8%A7%89%E8%BF%B7%E5%BD%95/index.asp; 14.06.2021). Дафтари Ф. (2004). Краткая история исмаилизма. Традиции мусульманской общины. М.: АСТ, Ладомир. Декларация Военного правительства провинции Юньнань об объявлении войны маньчжурам (1968). Синьхайская революция. 1911–1913 гг. Сборник документов и материалов. М.: ГРВЛ; Наука. С. 90–95. Деррида Ж. (2000). О грамматологии. Пер. с фр. и вст. ст. Н. Автономовой. М.: Ad Marginem. 512 с. Джувейни (2004). Чингиз-хан. История завоевателя мира. М.: Магистр-Пресс. Дмитриев С. В., Кузьмин С. Л. (2014). Империя Цин как Китай: анатомия исторического мифа. Восток (1). С. 5–17. Дмитриев С. В., Кузьмин С. Л. (2012). Что такое Китай? Срединное государство в историческом мифе и реальной политике. Восток (3). С. 5–19. Донская А. Е. (2003). Стихийные бедствия и власть в цинском Китае: организация помощи голодающим. V научн. сессия по историографии и источниковедению истории Китая. СПб: СПбГУ. С. 24–28. Доронин Б. Г. (1995). Были ли «династиями» чао (дай)? Общество и государство в Китае. С. 153–158. Дробышев Ю. И. (2019). Монгольская имперская идеология: понятийный аппарат исследования. Кочевые империи Евразии в свете археологических и междисциплинарных исследований: Сб. научн. статей IV междунар. конгресса средневековой археологии евразийских степей, посвящ. 100-летию российской академической археологии. В 2 кн. Кн. 2. Отв. ред. Б. В. Базаров, Н. Н. Крадин. Улан-Удэ: БНЦ СО РАН. С. 28–31. Дубровская Д. В. (2000). Миссия иезуитов в Китае. Маттео Риччи и другие (1552– 1775). М.: ИВ РАН, Крафт+. Дубровская Д. В. (2019). Парадигма Лан Шинина и «кастильонески» из собрания Государственного музея Востока (коллекция В. С. Калабушкина). Восточный Курьер / Oriental Courier. № 1–2. С. 61–72. Дулов В. И. (1959). Присоединение Тувы к России в 1914 г. Ученые записки ТНИИЯЛИ. Кызыл (7). С. 11–33. Зориктуев Б. Р. (2009). О происхождении и семантике этнического названия монгол. Вестник Бурятского гос. ун-та. № 10. С. 125–130. Зориктуев Б. Р. (2011). Об этимологии этнонима монгол. Восток. № 1. С. 47–57. Ибн ал-Асир (2006). «Ал-Камил фи-т-тарих» «Полный свод по истории». Избранные отрывки. Ташкент: Узбекистан. 289 История Китая с древнейших времен до начала XXI века (2016). Т. 1. Древнейшая и древняя история (по археологическим данным). От палеолита до V в. до н. э. М.: Наука. С. 481–484. История Тувы (1964). М.: Наука. Т. 2. 455 с. Исхаков Д. М. (2016). Термин «татаро-монголы/монголо-татары»: понятие политическое или этническое? Опыт источникового и концептуального анализа. Золотоордынское обозрение. (4)2. С. 420–442. ИЧЦВ (2001). Инь Чжоу цзиньвэнь цзичэн иньдэ (殷周金文集成引得; Указатель иероглифов, встречающихся в надписях на бронзовых сосудах Шан-Инь и Чжоу). Гл. ред. Чжан Ячу (張亞初). Пекин: Чжунхуа шуцзюй. Киракос Гандзакеци (1976). История Армении. Пер. Л. А. Ханларян. М.: Наука. 357 c. Кляшторный С. Г. (1993) Государства татар в Центральной Азии (дочингисова эпоха). Mongolica: К 750-летию «Сокровенного сказания». М.: Наука. С. 139–147. Комнина А. (1996). Алексиада / Анна Комнина; пер. с греч. Я. Н. Любарского. СПб.: Алетейя. 703 c. Конституции Тувы (1999). 1921–1993. Кызыл: Тув. книжн. изд-во. 214 с. Корреспонденции (1805). Copies or Extracts of all Dispatches or Correspondence received from INDIA, since the last Session of Parliament, relative to Hostilities between the British Governments and a Marhatta Chief, called Jeswunt Rao Holkar, and the Causes thereof; as far as is consistent with the Public Service, and the good Faith due to Persons from whom Secret Intelligence may have been received. S.l.: s.n. Крюков В. М. (2000). Текст и ритуал. Опыт интерпретации древнекитайской эпиграфики эпохи Инь–Чжоу. М.: Памятники исторической мысли. Кузнецова-Фетисова М. Е. (2013). Название древней столицы Шан (XVI–XI вв. до н. э.): термины Шан и Инь. Общество и государство в Китае. Ч. 1. М. С. 177–183. Кузнецова-Фетисова М. Е. (2015). «Великий город Шан» (XIV–XI вв. до н. э.) и его значение в древней истории Китая. М.: Наука; Востлит. Кузьмин С. Л. (2012). Отношения «наставник — покровитель» и проблема статуса Тибета. Наука и буддизм. Улан-Удэ. С. 261–273. Кузьмин С. Л. (2019). Материалы Ф. И. Щербатского о причинах бегства Далай-ламы XIII в Индию в 1910 г. Тибетология и буддология на стыке науки и религии. (Труды Института востоковедения РАН, 23). С. 142–166. Курбский А. (1914). История о великом князе Московском. Сочинения князя Курбского. Т. I. СПб. С. 161–354. Кычанов Е. М. (1993). Владимир Васильевич Горский (1819–1847). Православие на Дальнем Востоке. 275-летие Российской духовной миссии в Китае. СПб: Андреев и сыновья. С. 31–37. Лебедев Г. С. (1985). Эпоха викингов в Северной Европе. Л.: Лен. Ун-т. 286 с. Леви-Строс К. (1985). Структурная антропология. Перевод с фр. под ред. и с прим. В. В. Иванова. Отв. ред. Н. А. Бутинов, В. В. Иванов. М.: ГРВЛ. Ленин В. И. (1963). Полн. собр. соч. М.: Политиздат (31). Ли Сюэцинь (1978) (李学勤). Лунь Ши Цян пань цзи ци ии (论史墙盘及其意义; О блюде «Ши Цян пань» и его значении). Каогу сюэбао. № 2. С. 149–158. Лосев Α. Φ. (2001). Диалектика мифа. Сост., общ. ред. А. А. Тахо-Годи, В. П. Троицкого. М.: Мысль. 558 с. Люйши Чуньцю (2010) Весны и осени господина Люя. Пер. Г. А. Ткаченко. Сост. И. В. Ушакова. М.: Мысль. Мартынов А. С. (1978). Статус Тибета в XVII–XVIII веках в традиционной китайской системе политических представлений. М.: ГРВЛ. 290 Материалы по истории сюнну (по китайским источникам) (1973). Вып. 2. Пер. В. С. Таскина. М.: Наука. 168 c. Материалы по истории туркмен и Туркмении. VII–XV вв. Арабские и персидские источники. (1939). М.; Л.: АН СССР. Матузова В. И. (1979). Английские средневековые источники IX–XIII вв. М.: Наука, 268 с. Международное право. Словарь-справочник (1997). М.: ИНФРА-М. 274 с. Мифы, легенды, предания тувинцев (2010). Памятники фольклора народов Сибири и Дальнего Востока. Новосибирск: Наука. № 28. С. 32–33. Молчанов Л. А. (2012) «Урянхайский вопрос может быть решен лишь путем мирных переговоров». Документы Временного Сибирского и Российского правительств, 1918–1919 гг. Исторический архив. М.: История – Сервис. (3). С. 84–105. Москаленко Н. П. (2000). Основные проблемы этнополитической истории Тувы в XX в. Автореферат… к. и. н. М. С. 13–14. Мэн-да бэй-лу (1975). Полное описание монголо-татар. Пер. Н. Ц. Мункуева. М.: Наука. 288 с. Нанзатов Б. З., Тишин В. В. (2021). К истории татар Внутренней Азии: опыт идентификации племенных названий. Золотоордынское обозрение. Т. 9. № 1. С. 8–27. Михайлова Ю. (1989). Некоторые тенденции развития социально-политической мысли Японии в период Токугава (1603 1867). Япония: идеология, культура, литература. М.: Наука. С. 40–47. Новиков Б. М. (1970). Антиманьчжурская пропаганда тайных обществ в Китае в первой половине XIX в. Тайные общества в старом Китае. М.: ГРВЛ «Наука». С. 39–53. Норт Д. (2010). Понимание процесса экономических изменений. Пер. с англ. К. Мартынова, Н. Эдельмана. М.: Изд. дом ВШЭ. 256 с. Обращение [Военного правительства Хубэй] к стране (1968). Синьхайская революция. 1911–1913 гг. Сборник документов и материалов. М.: ГРВЛ Наука. C. 50–52. Очерки Тувинской организации КПСС (1975). Кызыл: Тув. книжн. изд-во. 405 с. Очур В. Ч. (1967). Великий Октябрь и Тува. Кызыл: Тув. книжн. изд-во. 264 с. Ошанин И. М. (Рук. и ред.) (1984). Большой китайско-русский словарь. М.: ГРВЛ Наука (1–4). Памятники литературы Древней Руси (1981). XIII век. М.: Худлит. 620 c. Пань Фэн (潘峰) (2006). Ши «цин» (释“青”; Объяснение знака «цин»). Ханьцзы вэньхуа. № 1. С. 41–44. Пиотровский М. П. (1991). Зу-л-Карнайн. Ислам: энциклопедический словарь. М.: Наука, 1991. C. 78–79. Карпини П. (1997). История монголов. Путешествия в восточные страны. М.: Мысль. С. 29–85. Попова И. Ф. 2005. Сакрализация власти в Традиционном Китае. Сакрализация власти в истории цивилизаций. C. 364–386. Прудников В. В. (2019). Deus adiuva! Норманнские рыцари в Анатолии XI–XII вв. М.: ИВ РАН. 312 с. Прудников В. В. (2020а). Кто отнял у арабов Сицилию? Термины для обозначения социальных общностей у норманнов в хронике Гауфреда Малатерры (конец XI в.). Вестник ИВ РАН. № 2. С. 218–231. Прудников В. В. (2020б). Норманны и тюрки-сельджуки на поле боя. Восточный курьер / Oriental Courier. № 3–4. C. 139–158. Пэн Да-я, Сюй Тин. Краткие известия о черных татарах. Пер. Р. П. Храпачевского. Золотая орда в источниках. Т. III. Китайские и монгольские источники. М.: [Б.и.], 2009. С. 27–120. 291 Рашид ад-Дин. (1952). Сборник летописей. Т. I. Кн. 1. Пер. Л. А. Хетагурова. М.; Л.: АН СССР. 220 c. Родословное древо тюрков. (1906). Сочинение Абуль-Гази, хивинского хана. Известия общества археологии, истории и этнографии при императорском Казанском университете. Т. XXI. Вып. 5–6. Казань: Типолитография ун-та. 224 c. Родригес А. М. (2011). Реформация и модернизация религиозной и политической идеологии на Востоке (XIX–XX вв.). М.: Прометей. 224 с. Рыкин П. О. (2002). Создание монгольской идентичности: термин «монгол» в эпоху Чингисхана. Вестник Евразии. № 1 (16). С. 48–84. Рыкин П. О. (2014). Этническая идентичность средневековых монголов как политический конструкт: опыт анализа источников. Сибирь в контексте русской модели колонизации (XVII – начало XX в.). Отв. ред. Л. Р. Павлинская. СПб.: МАЭ РАН. С. 248–294. Сафьянов И. (2012). Художественное творчество тувинского народа. Фотоархив: Тува в прошлом. М. (1). 232 с. Сейфулин Х. М. (1954). Образование Тувинской автономной области РСФСР. Кызыл: Тувкнигиздат. 260 с. Сейфулин Х. М. (1956). К истории Гражданской войны и иностранной интервенции в Туве (1918–1921 гг.). Кызыл: Тув. книжн. изд-во. 120 с. Сейфулин Х. М. (1968). ТНР — важный этап в истории тувинского народа. Ученые записки ТНИИЛИ. Кызыл (3). С. 3–28. Семенова Е. (2014). Круг почета: памятники и портреты выдающихся индийцев в парламенте страны. Глушкова И. П. (рук. проекта), Прокофьева И. Т. (отв. ред.). Под небом Южной Азии. Портрет и скульптура: визуализация территорий, идеологий и этносов через материальные объекты. М.: Наука; Востлит. Сердобов Н. А. (1985). Коминтерн и Революционная Тува. Кызыл: Тув. книжн. изд-во. Ред.: А. Я. Гуревич, Ю. К. Кузьменко et al. 691 с. Сидихменов В. Я. (1985). Маньчжурские правители Китая. М.: Наука. Сидорова С. Е. (2016). Индийский хлопок и британский интерес. Овеществленная политика в колониальную эпоху. СПб.: Нестор-История. Снорри Стурлусон (1980). Круг Земной. М.: Наука. Стабурова Е. Ю. (1980). К характеристике антиманьчжуризма XVIII в. (По материалам «Да и цзюэ ми лу»). Общество и государство в Китае. М.: ИВ АН СССР (2). С. 105–111. Сунь Ятсен. (1985). Избранные произведения. М.: Наука. Сыма Цянь (1972). Исторические записки (Ши цзи). Пер., комм. Р. В. Вяткина и В. С. Таскина под. ред. Р. В. Вяткина. Вст. ст. М. В. Крюкова. Т. I. М.: ГРВЛ; Наука. Сыма Цянь (1986). Исторические записки (Ши цзи). Пер., комм. Р. В. Вяткина и В. С. Таскина. Т. IV М.: ГРВЛ; Наука. Сыма Цянь (1987). Исторические записки (Ши цзи). Пер., комм. Р. В. Вяткина и В. С. Таскина. Т. V. М.: ГРВЛ; Наука. Сэмюелс У. (2015). «Истина и «дискурс» в социальном конструировании реальности. Истоки: качественные сдвиги в экономической реальности и экономической науке. В. С. Автономов (гл. ред.). М.: Изд. дом ВШЭ. С. 13–30. Тан Лань, 1978. Тан Лань (唐兰). Люэлунь Си Чжоу Вэй ши цзяцзу цзяо-цзан тунцицунь дэ чжунъяо ии (略论西周微史家族窖藏铜器群的重要意义; Важность бронзовых сосудов времен Западной Чжоу, обнаруженных в подвале семейства вэйских скрибов). Вэньу. 1978. № 3. С. 19–24. Тань Сытун (1981). Жэнь сюе (Учение о человечности). Тань Сытун цюаньцзи (Полное собрание сочинений Тань Сытуна). Пекин. В 2 т. Телеграмма [Ли Юань-хуна] маньчжурскому правительству (1968). Синьхайская революция. 1911–1913 гг. Сб. документов и материалов. М.: ГРВЛ; Наука. C. 50–52. 292 Тизенгаузен В. (1884). Сборник материалов, относящихся к истории Золотой Орды. Т. I. Извлечения из сочинений арабских. СПб.: Типография Имп. АН. 564 c. Тимохин Д. М. (2019). Об употреблении термина «татар» в сочинении Джузджани «Табакат-и Насири» при описании домонгольского периода. Золотоордынское наследие: Материалы VI Международного Золотоордынского Форума «Pax Tatarica: генезис и наследие государственности Золотой Орды». Вып. 3. Казань: Ин-т истории им. Ш. Марджани АН РТ, 2019. С. 22–30. Тихвинский С. Л. (1966). Маньчжурское владычество в Китае. Маньчжурское владычество в Китае. М.: ГРВЛ Наука. С. 5–76. Тока С. К. (1943). Зарождение Тувинской народно-революционной партии. Под знамя Ленина-Сталина. Кызыл (5). С. 22–44. Фелдхаус Э. (2016). Алгебра места. Дублирование североиндийской религиозной географии в Махараштре. Пер. с англ. М. Павловой. Глушкова И. П. (рук. проекта), Бочковская А. В. (отв. ред.). Под небом Южной Азии. Территория и принадлежность: геополитическое конструирование и субъектность восприятия обитаемых пространств. М.: Наука–Востлит. С. 342–66. Фуко М. (2004). Археология знания. Пер. с фр. М. Б. Раковой, А. Ю. Серебрянниковой; вступ. ст. А. С. Колесникова. СПб.: Гум. Академия; Университетская книга. 416 с. Хаутала Р. (2019). В землях «Северной Тартарии»: Сведения латинских источников о Золотой Орде в правление хана Узбека (1313–1341). Казань: Ин-т истории им. Ш. Марджани АН РТ. 976 с. Хаутала Р. (2015) От «Давида, царя Индий» до «Ненавистного плебса сатаны». Антология ранних латинских сведений о татаро-монголах. Казань: Ин-т истории им. Ш. Марджани АН РТ. 496 с. Хотинец В. Ю. Этническое самосознание. СПб.: Алетейя, 2000. 240 с. Храпачевский Р. П. (2015) «Татары», «монголы», и «монголо-татары» IX–XII вв. по китайским источникам. М.: Перо. 334 c. Храпачевский Р. П. (2005) Военная держава Чингисхана. М.: АСТ. 557 с. Хуайнаньцзы (2016). Хуайнаньцзы: философы из Хуайнани. Пер. с кит., вст. ст. и прим. Л. Е. Померанцевой. М.: Наука–Вост. Лит. Чжао Эрсюнь дэн чжуань (сост. Чжао Эрсюнь и др.). (2003). Цин ши гао (Черновая история Цин). Пекин: Чжунхуа шуцзюй (13) (126 цзюаней). Л. 3724–3726. Чжу Хунъюань (1995). Тунмэнхуй дэ гэмин лилунь (Революционная теория Тунмэнхуя). Тайбэй: Чжунъян яньцзююань цзиньдайши яньцзюсо. Шавкунов Э. В. (1987) Еще раз об этимологии этнонима монгол. Древний и средневековый Восток. М.: Наука. С. 165–171. Шу-цзин / Попова — Шу-цзин («Канон записей») / иссл., пер., комм. и указат. Г. С. Поповой; ИВ РАН. М.; СПб.: Нестор-История, 2020. Шэнь Юньлу бянь (под ред. Шэнь Юньлу). (1969). Цин Юнчжэн-ди чжуань «Да и цзюэ ми лу» («Записи о великой правде, просвещающей заблудших», составленные цинским императором Юнчжэном). Тайбэй: Вэнь хай чубаньшэ. Юань Кэ (1987). Мифы древнего Китая. Пер., комм. Б. Л. Рифтина. М.: ГРВЛ. Юнчжэн (1778). Китайския поучения, изданныя от хана Юнджена для воинов и простаго народа, во 2 году царствования его (в 1724). Пер. с кит. на российской язык секретарь Леонтиев. СПб: Тип. АН. Abbot G. (1988). Stories of Indian Saints: Translation of Mahipati’s Marathi Bhaktavijaya. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. 1–2. Ademarus S. (1853). Cibardi monachus. Historiarum libri tres. Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Latina (еd. J. Р. Migne). 141. 293 Ajgavkar J. R. (1924). Mahārāṣṭra kavicaritra. Mumbai: s.n., 6. al-Baghdadi, Baha ad-Din Mohammad (1937). at-Tavassul ila at-Tarassul. Тehran: Ketabhaneyye Ahmad Bahmanyar. Albert of Aachen. (2007). Historia Hierosolymitana. History of the Journey to Jerusalem. Ed. and trans. S. B. Edgington. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 949 р. al-Qummi, Najm al-Din Abu l-Riza’ (1985/1363). Tarikh al-Wuzara. Tehran: Muassase-i Mutalaat va Tahkikat-ı Farhangi. al-Razi Fakhr al-Din (1988). Jami’ al-’ulum. Lahor: Farid-bek sial. Amatus di Montecassino (1935). Storia dei normanni di Amato di Montecassino. Roma: Tipografia del Senato (Fonti per la Storia d`Italia). Cxix. 423. Anonymi. (1924). Gesta Francorum et aliorum Hierosolymitanorum. Ed. by B. A. Lees, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1924. 156 р. Anon. (1924). Anon. Indian Emigration from Hyderabad. The Servant of India. VII (24). Pp. 280–81. Athavle Anant Damodar (2013). Santkavi śrīdāsgaṇū mahārāj caritra āṇi kāvyavivecan, Gorte: Shridasganumaharaj pratishthan. Babicz L. (1889). The Birth of Modern Japan. Japan‘s Multilayered Democracy. Ed. by S. Ben-Rafael Galanti, N. Otmazgin, A. Levkowitz. Lanham, Boulder. NY, L.: Lexington Books, 30. Baillie J. (1821). Metrical Legends of Exalted Characters. By Joanna Baillie, Author of Plays on the Passions. L.: Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, and Brown. Baillie J. (1849). Ahalya Baee, a Poem by Mrs. Joanna Baillie. L.: Spottiswoodes and Shaw. Baillie J. (1851) The Dramatic and Poetical Works of Joanna Baillie, Complete in One Volume. L.: Longman; Brown; Green; Longmans. Baldrici Episcopi Dolensis (1869). Historia Jerosolimitana. Recueil des historiens des croisades. Historiens occidentaux. T. 4. Episcopi Dolensis Baldric. Paris. Pp.1–89. Basu B. D. (1923). Rise of the Christian Power in India. In 5 vols. Calcutta: R. Chatterji. Baxter W. H. (1983). A Look at the History of Chinese Colour Terminology. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association. 19. 2. Pp. 1–25. Beckwith C. I. (2016). The Earliest Chinese Words for ‘The Chinese’: The Phonology, Meaning, and Origin of the Epithet Ḥarya ~ Ārya in East Asia. Journal Asiatique. 304.2. Pp. 231–248. Benedict XIV (1742). Ex Quo Singulari: Confirmatio, et Innovatio Constitutionis Incipientis Ex illa die a Clemente Papa XI. Roma: ex Typographia Reverendae Camerae Apostolicae. Bevilacqua D. (2018). Old Tool for New Times: The Discovery of an Ancient Holy Site in Contemporary India. Journal of the British Association for the Study of Religions. 20. Pp. 45–66. Bharati A. (1970). The Hindu Renaissance and Its Apologetic Patterns. The Journal of Asian Studies. 29(2). Bhate G. C. (1939). History of Modern Marathi Literature: 1800–1938. Mahad: A. V. Patwardhan. Bhatt G. P. (1955). The Gautami Mahatmya (the English translation of the fourth part of the Brahma-purana) [https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/gautami-mahatmya]. Bhave V. L. (1963). Mahārāṣṭra sārasvat: Puravṇī Ś. G. Tuḷpuḷe, Mumbai: Popular prakashan. Bhingarkar D. V. (1989). Sant kavaitrī janābāī. Caritra: kāvya: kāmgirīi. Mumbai: Majestic prakashan. Big Chinese Encyclopedia of Books (1994). 中國大書典。 北京： 中國書店. Peking: Zhongguo shudian. 294 Biran M. (2015). The Mongols and Nomadic Identity: The Case of the Kitans in China. Nomads as Agents of Cultural Exchange. The Mongols and their Eurasian Predecessors. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pp. 152–181. Bogushevskaya V. (2015). Chinese GRUE: On the Original Meaning and Evolution of Qīng 青. L’Analisi Linguistica e Letteraria. XXIII. Pp. 61–76. Bottici C. (2006). Rethinking political myth. The Clash of Civilization as a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy. European Journal of Social Theory 9(3). Pp. 315–336. Broughton T. D. (1977). Letters from a Mahratta Camp during the Year 1809 Descriptive of the Character, Manners, Domestic Habits and Religious Ceremonies if the Mahrattas. Calcutta: K. P. Bagchi & Company (1813, 1892). Brownlee J. S. (1991). Political Thought in Japanese Historical Writing: From Kojiki (712) to Tokushi Yōron (1712). Waterloo: Wilfried Laurier University Press. 158 р. Bryant G. J. (1985). Scots in India in the Eighteenth Century. The Scottish Historical Review. Vol. LXIV. No. 77. Burway M. W. (1922). Devi Ahilyabai Holkar. Indore: Holkar State (Electric) Printing Press (2nd ed.). Cambridge History of Iran. Vol. 5. (1968). The Saljuq and Mongol Periods. Cambridge: University Press. Caterina L. (2011). Notes Regarding the Chinese Gifts of Matteo Ripa. Ming Qing Yanjiu, 16: 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1163/24684791-01601002. Cavaliero R. (2002). Strangers in the Land: The Rise and Decline of the British Indian Empire. L.; NY: I. B. Tauris Publishers. Chakravorty U. N. (1937). Anglo-Maratha Relations and Malcolm 1798–1830. New Delhi: Associated Publishing House. Chaudhari K. K (1988). Mahārāṣṭra rājya gajheṭiar: Parbhaṇī jilhā. Mumbai: Darshanika vibhag, Maharashtra shasan. Christie W. (2013). “To Barbicue a Poet or Two or Strangle a Metaphysician”: The Founding of Francis Jeffrey’s Edinburgh Review // University of Edinburgh Journal. Vol. 46. No. 2. Cirillo L. (2010). Il Vangelo secondo Matteo Ripa. La Vita del Missionario che Conquistò la Cina. Napoli: Iuppiter. Cohen P. A. (2013). China and Christianity: The Missionary Movement and the Growth of Chinese Antiforeignism, 1860–1870. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/ harvard.9780674283633. Cohen W. I. (1978). The Chinese Connection: Roger S. Greene, Thomas W. Lamont, George E. Sokolsky and American-East Asian Relations. NY: Columbia U Press. Commeaux Ch. La vie quotidienne chez les Mongols de la conquètte (XIIIe siècle). Paris, 1972, Hachette, 364. Corsi E. (1997). Late Baroque Painting in China Prior to the Arrival of Matteo Ripa, Giovanni Gherardini and the Perspective Painting Called Xianfa. M. Fatica, Fr. D’Arelli (eds.). La Missione Catolica in Cina tra i Secoli XVIII–XIX: Matteo Ripa e il Collegio dei Cinesi: Atti dei Colloquio Internazionale. Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale. Pp. 103–122. Criveller G. (2012). La Conrtoversia dei Riti Cinesi, Storia di una Lunga Incompresione. Milano: Centro di Cultura e Animazione Missionaria Pime. Cummins J. S. (1993). A Question of Rites: Friar Domingo Navarrete and the Jesuits in China. Aldershot: Cambridge (the Scholar Press). Dadkar Jaya, Ganorkar Prabha, Dahake Vasant Abaji, Bhatkal Sadanand (eds.) (1999). Saṅkṣipt Marāṭhī vaṅmaykoś: Ārambhāpāsūn 1920 paryantcā kālkhaṇḍ, Mumbai: J. R. Bhatkal Foundation. 295 Das Ganu (1999). Kīrtanopayogī ākhyān: Śrīsant Janābāī caritra. Gorte: Shridasganumaharaj pratishthan (3rd edn). Das Ganu (2012). Santkavi śrīdāsgaṇu mahārāj viracit śrīgodāmāhātmya. Gorte: Shridasganumaharaj pratishthan (4th edn). Deshpande P. (2007). Creative Pasts. Historical Memory and Identity in Western India 1700–1960. Ranikhet: Permanent Black. De Tournon Charles T. M., Giuseppe Bettinelli (1761). Memorie Storiche della Legazione e Morte dell’Eminentiss. Monsignor Cardinale di Tournon Esposte con Monumenti Rari ed Autentici non Piu Dati alla Luce. Venice: Collegio Massimo. Deleury G. A. (1960). The Cult of Viṭhobā, Poona: Deccan College Postgraduate and Research Institute. Deo S. (1940). United Maharashtra: A Case for the Formation of a New Province. Poona: Samyukta Maharashtra. Deshmukh M. (2020). The Mothers and Daughters of Bhakti: Janabai in Marathi Literature. International Journal of Hindu Studies. 24. Pp. 33–59. Dhere R. C. (1984). Viṭṭhal: ek mahāsamanvay. Pune: Shriviyda prakashan. Di Fiore G. (1985). “Un Cinese a Castel Sant’Angelo. La Vicenda di un Alunno del Collegio di Matteo Ripa fra Trasgressione e Reclusione”. Ugo Marazzi (ed.). La Conoscenza dell’Asia e dell’Africa in Italia nei Secoli XVIII e XIX. Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale. Pp. 219–286. Di Fiore G. (1989). La Legazione Mezzabarba in Cina (1720–1721). Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale. Dmitriev S V., Kuzmin S. L. (2015). Conquest Dynasties of China or Foreign Empires? The Problem of Relations between China, Yuan and Qing. International Journal of Central Asian Studies. 19. Pp. 59–92. Doerfer G. (1970). Der Name der Mongolen bei Rašîd ad-Dîn. Central Asiatic Journal. 14, 1/3. Pp. 68–77. Dudonis Sancti Qvintini (1865). De moribus et actis primorum Normanniae ducum. Dudo. Gaen: F. le Blanc-Hardel. 317 р. Duff J. G. (1990). History of the Mahrattas. Vol. 3. Delhi: Low Price Publication (1823). Dunne G. H. (1962). Generation of Giants: The Story of the Jesuits in China in the Last Decades of the Ming Dynasty. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press. Eck D. L. (2012). India: A Sacred Geography. NY: Harmony Books. Elphinstone M. (1838). Report on the Territories Conquered from the Paishwa. Bombay: Bombay Government Press (1818). Encyclopaedia Britannica (2020). Matteo Ripa. Chinese Architecture: The Qing Dynasty (1644–1911/12). May 1, 2020 [https://www.britannica.com/biography/Matteo-Ripa]. Fatica M. (1991). Introduzione. Ripa M.. Giornale (1705–1724). Critical article notes and documentary appendix by Michele Fatica. In 2 Vols. Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale. Pp. XXV–CLXX. Fatica M. (2006). Matteo Ripa e il Collegio dei Cinesi di Napoli (1682–1869). Percorso Documentario e Iconografico. Napoli. Fatica M. (2012). Richiesta di Misure Restrittive e di Espulsione di Mercanti e Missionari Occidentali dal Paese di Mezzo in un Memoriale dell’A.D. 1717 Conservato da Matteo Ripa. Scritture di Storia. 6. Pp. 175–212. Fatica M. and Carpentiero V. (1989). Per una Storia del Processo di Canonizzazione di Matteo Ripa: Problemi di Filologia e di Agiografia. M. Fatica and V. Carpentiero (eds.) La Conoscenza dell’Asia e dell’Africa in Italia nei Secoli XVIII e XIX. Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale. Pp. 73–110. Feldhaus A. A. (2003). Connected Places: Region, Pilgrimage, and Geographical Imagination in India. NY: Palgrave Macmillan. 296 Ferris I. (undated) The Debut of the Edinburgh Review, 1802. Felluga Dino Franco (ed.). Extension of Romanticism and Victorianism on the Net. Web. BRANCH: Britain, Representation and Nineteenth-Century History. Flood C. (1996). Political Myth: A Theoretical Introduction. NY [u.a.]: Garland. Fortescue J. W. (1910). A History of the British Army. Vol. V (1803–1807). L.: Macmillan and Co.б (2nd ed.). Fulcheri Carnotensis (1913). Historia Hierosolymitana: 1095–1127. hrsg von Heinrich Hagenmeyer. Heidelberg: Winter. 917 р. Fu Lo-Shu (1966). A Documentary Chronicle of Sino-Western Relations (1644–1820). Tuscon, AZ: Univ. of Arizona Press. Fuchs W. (1935). Materialen zur Kartographie der Mandju-Zeit. Monumenta Serica. I. Pp. 428–477. Gaufredus Malaterra (1928). De rebus gestis Rogerii Calabriae et Siciliae comitis et Roberti Guiscardi ducis fratris eius. Rerum Italicarum scriptores. Raccolta degli storici italiani. Bologna: N. Zanichelli, 5. 172 p. Geley J.-Ph (1979). L’ethnonyme mongol à l’époque pré-činggisqanide (XII s.): Étude d’ethnologie politique du nomadisme. Études mongoles. Cahier 10. Pp. 59–89. Giessauf J. (2007–2008). A Programme of Terror and Cruelty: Aspects of Mongol strategy in the Light of Western Sources. Chronica: Annual of the Institute of History. University of Szeged, Hungary. Pp. 7–8, 85–96. Giles H. A. (1912). China and the Manchus. Cambridge (http://www.gutenberg.org). Glushkova I. (2013). Popular Death in Maharashtra: Cultural Appropriation as a Means for Space and Time Control. Hieron: Indian Religions Across Time and Space (Studies in Comparative Religion Vol. 2 [XI]), Bratislava: Comenius University, Dep. of Comparative Religion. Pp. 5–18. Glushkova I. (2014). Banāras, the Concept of Tristhaḷī(-yātrā) and the Inflow of the Marathas: An alternative view Banāras Revisited: Scholarly Pilgrimages to the City of Light (Ethno-Indology: Heidelberg Studies in South Asian Rituals, 14), Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. Pp. 113–32. Gondhalekar R. S. (1892). Nāmdevācī Gāthā, Pune: Jagadahitecchu Press. Guiberti abbate monasterii Sanctae Mariae Novigenti (1879). Historia quae dicitur Gesta Dei per Francos. Recueil des historiens des croisades. Historiens occidentaux. ed. l’Académie royale des Inscriptions et belles-lettres. P.: Imprimerie royale, IV. Pp. 113–221. Guillaumus Tyrensus Archiepiscopus (1855). Historia rerum in partibus transmarinis gestarum. Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Latina. Ed. by J. P. Migne. P.: Garnier Frères, 201. Pp. 209–892. Guillermi Apuliensis (1851). Gesta Roberti Wiscardi. Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores in Folio. Ed. by R. Köpke. Hannover: Hahn, IX. Pp. 239–298. Harrington J. (2010). Sir John Malcolm and the Creation of British India. Palgrave Studies in Cultural and Intellectual History. NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Heng G. (1998). Cannibalism, the First Crusade, and the Genesis of Medieval Romance. Differences. 10:1. Pp. 98–173. Histoire anonyme de la premiere croisade. Anonym (1924). Texte etabli et traduit par L. Brehier. P.: Les Belles Lettres. 258 p. Histoire des seldjoucides de l’Iraq par al-Bondari d’apres Imad ad-din al-Katib al-Isfahani. (1889). Leiden: E. J. Brill, II. Hsia Po-chia R. (2018). Christianity and Empire: The Catholic Mission in Late Imperial China. Studies in Church History, 54. Pp. 208–224. Huang Pei (1974). Autocracy at Work. A Study of the Yung-Cheng Period, 1723–1735. Blooming and L.: Indiana University Press. 297 Hummel A. (1943). Eminent Chinese of the Ching Period. Washington D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office (Library of Congress). (2). Pp. 747–748. Jeffrey F. (1840). Art. I. A Memoir of Central India, including Malwa and adjoining Provinces, with the History and Copious Illustrations of the Past and Present Condition of that Country. By Major-General Sir John Malcolm, G.C.B.K.L.S. 2 vols. 8vo. Kingsburry, Parbury & Allen. L., 1823. Edinburgh Review. 1824, July. No. LXXX. Joshi R. M. (1953). The Rajendras of Gangakhed and their Records. Indian Historical Record Commission Proceedings. Bhopal/Delhi: The Manager of Publications, XXIX. Pt. II. Pp. 64–68. Juvaini A. (1997). The History of the World-Conqueror. Trans. by J. A. Boyle. Manchester: Manchester Univ. Press. 763 p. Kafesoğlu I. (1956). Harezmşahlar devleti tarihi (485–617/1092–1229). Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi. Kam Tak-sing (2017). The Term Mongγol Revisited. Central Asiatic Journal. 60, 1–2. Pp. 183–206. Karve I. (1988). ‘On the Road’: A Maharashtrian Pilgrimage. Zelliot Eleanor, Berntsen Maxine (eds). The Experience of Hinduism: Essays on Religion in Maharashtra. Albany: State University of New York Press. Pp. 142–71. Kate P. V. (1987). Marathwada Under the Nizams: 1724–1948. Delhi: Mittal Publications. Kaye J. W. (1856). The Life and Correspondence of Major-General Sir John Malcolm, G.C.B., Late Envoy to Persia, and Governor of Bombay; from Unpublished Letters and Journals. In 2 vols. L.: Smith, Elder, and Co. Keune J. (2007). Gathering the Bhaktas in Marāṭhī: The Bhaktavijay of Mahipati. Journal of Vaishnava Studies. Spring. Pp. 169–187. Keune J. (2015). ‘Conditions for Historicising Religion: Hindu Saints, Regional Identity, and Social Change in Western India, ca. 1600–1900. O. Bernd-Christian, S. Rau, J. Rüpke (eds). History and Religion: Narrating a Religious Past. Berlin: De Gruyter. Pp. 227–240. Khadpekar V. (2008). Dñyāt adñyāt Ahilyābāī Hoḷkar. Pune: Rajhans. Kim Hodong (2015). Was ‘Da Yuan; a Chinese Dynasty? Journal of Song-Yuan Studies. 45. Pp. 279–305. Kincaid C. A. (1927). Teachers of India. L.–Bombay: Humphey Milford. Klaus A. (2017). Inventing a State Ceremony: Ottmar von Mohl, Jinmu-tenno and Proclamation of the Meiji Constitution on February 11th. Kuzmin S. L. (2011). Hidden Tibet. History of Independence and Occupation. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives. Kuzmin S. L. (2012). Collapse of the Qing Empire and reestablishment of the independence of Mongolia. The History and Culture of Mongols in the 20th Century (Borjigin H. and Junko I. eds.). Fukyosha. Pp. 113–143. Latourette K. S. (1929). A History of Christian Missions in China. L.: Macmillan. Legge J. (1939). The Chinese Classics: With a Translation, Critical and Exegetical Notes, Prolegomena, and Copious Indexes. By J. Legge, D. D., of the London Missionary Society. In 7 Vols. L., 1865. Lisiecki M. (2015). Myth and Mythologization in Ideology and Politics. The Mythologization of Japanese Identity in the Meiji Period. Sprawy Narodowościowe. Seria Nowa. 47. Pp. 134–146. Liu Yaxuan (2011). Ma Guoxian Huiyilu Suo Fanyingde Yige Wenti [Several Problems Reflected in “Memoirs of Ma Guoxian”]. Tushuguan Lilun yu Shujian [Library Theory and Practice]. 8. Liu Yu (2008). Transplanting a Different Gardening Style into England: Matteo Ripa and His Visit to London in 1724. Diogenes. 55, 2. Pp. 83–96. 298 Llewellyn J. E. (2019). Saints, Hagiographers, and Religious Experience: The Case of Tukaram and Mahipati. Religions. 10(2), 10 (https://doi.org/10.3390/rel10020110). Loar J. (2018). From Neither/Nor to Both/And: Reconfiguring the Life and Legacy of Shirdi Sai Baba in Hagiography. International Journal of Hindu Studies, 22. Pp. 475–96. Loud G. A. (1981). The ‘Gens Normannorum’: Myth or Reality? Anglo-Norman Studies, (4). Pp. 104–116. Lubabu ‘l-Albab of Muhammad ‘Awfi (1906). Leyden: E. J. Brill; L., Luzac & Co. Lushchenko M. (2011). L’image de l’Asie Mineure et des Turcs dans les textes narratifs du Moyen Âge français (XIIe-milieu du XVe siècle). Vancouver. P. 295. Mahipati (1974). Śrībhakta vijay. Mahīpatībuvā Tāhrābādkar viracit. Pune: Yashvant prakashan. Malcolm J. (1823). A Memoir of Central India, including Malwa, and Adjoining Provinces. Vol. I. London: Printed by S. and R. Bentley. Marvazi Sharaf al-Zaman Tahir (1942). On China, the Turcs and India. L.: The Royal Asiatic Society. McLaine K. (2016). The Afterlife of Sai Baba: Competing Visions of a Global Saint. Seattle–L.: University of Washington Press. McLean T. (2010). (Еd.). Further Letters of Joanna Baillie. Madison; Teaneck: Fairleigh Dickinson Univ. Press. Mélikoff I. (1960). La geste de Melik Dānişmend. Étude critique du Dānişmendnāme. Maisonneuve. Bibliothèque archéologique et historique de l’Institut français d’archéologie d’Istanbul. 10–11, II, 812. Menegon E. (2008). Jesuit-Dominican Controversies over Chinese Rituals: European and Chinese Textual Strategies. Boston: Boston University press. Migne J. P. (1844). Ermoldus Nigellus. Carmina in honorem Hludovici. Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Latina. Garnier Frères. 105. Pp. 551– 638. Minamiki G. (1985). The Chinese Rites Controversy: from its Beginning to Modern Times. Chicago: Loyola University Press. Monod G. (1885). Études critiques sur les sources de l’histoire mérovingienne: La Compilation Dite de Frédégaire [Text] / Gabriel Monod. 10, Paris: F. Vieweg, 176. Mungello D. E. (1994). The Chinese Rites Controversy: Its History and Meaning. Nettetal: Steyler Verlag. Mungello D. E. (2009). The Great Encounter of China and the West 1500–1800. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Narasimha Swamiji (2004). Life of Sai Baba: All Four Parts in One Composite Volume (Pt. II: Sai’s Apostles, Mission, and Work). Chennai: All India Sai Samaj. Nishaburi Zahir ad-Din (1953). Salguk-name. Tehran: Chaphaney-e Havar Tehran. Novetzke Ch. Lee (2009). History, Bhakti, and Public Memory: Namdev in Religious and Secular Traditions. Ranikhet: Permanent Black. O’Malley, John W., Alexander B. Gauvin, Steven J. Harris and Frank T. Kennedy (2006). The Jesuits II: Cultures, Sciences, and the Arts, 1540–1773. Toronto: University of Toronto. Оrderici Vitalis angligenae coenobii Uticensis monachi (1855). Historia Ecclesiastica / Vitalis Оrdericus. Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Latina. ed. by J. P. Migne. P.: Garnier Frères. T. 188. Рp. 17–984. Orme R. (1810). Historical Fragments of the Mogul Empire, of the Morattoes, and of the English Concerns in Indostan from the Year M.DC.LIX. L.: F. Wingrave. Otgon Borjigin (2012). A Brief Introduction to the Historical Relics of the Hexi Corridor from the Time of the Mongol Empire. Mongolian Studies. No. 34. Pp. 77–85. 299 Painter S. (1969). Western Europe on the Eve of the Crusades. A History of the Crusades. The First Hundred Years. Еd. by K. M. Setton and M. W. Balduwin. Philadelphia: University of Wisconsin Press. 1. Pp. 3–29. Pandharipande R. V. (2000). Janābāī: A Woman Saint of India. Sharma Arvind (ed.). Women Saints in World Religions. Albany: State University of New York Press. Pp. 145–80. Pankenier D. W. (1981). Astronomical Dates in Shang and Western Zhou. Early China. No. 7 (1981–82). Pp. 2–37. Pankenier D. W. (1995a). The Cosmo-Political Background of Heaven’s Mandate. Early China. No. 20. Pp. 121–176. Pankenier D. W. (1995б). Astrological Origins of Chinese Dynastic Ideology. Vistas in Astronomy. No. 39. Pp. 503–516. Pankenier D. W. (2010). Cosmic Capitals and Numinous Precincts in Early China. Journal of Cosmology. No. 9. Pp. 2030–2040. Pankenier D. W. (2013). Astrology and Cosmology in Early China. Cambridge Univ. Press. Kindle Edition. Pasley R. (1982). ‘Send Malcolm!’ The Life of Major-General Sir John Malcolm. L.: Basca; Putney. Parasnis D. B. (1910). Maheśvardarbārcī bātmīpatre [kārkīrd Ahalyābāī Hoḷkar]. Bhag 1, 2. Mumbai: Nirnaysagar chapkhana. Pearse H. (1908). Memoir of the Life and Military Services of Viscount Lake, Baron Lake of Delhi and Laswaree, 1744–1808. Edinburgh; L.: William Blackwood and Sons (MCMVIII). Pines Y. (2008). To Rebel is Justified? The Image of Zhouxin and the Legitimacy of Rebellion in the Chinese Political Tradition. Oriens Extremus. 47. Pp. 1–24. Pines Y. (2002). Changing Views of Tianxia in Pre-Imperial Discourse. Oriens extremus. 43. Pp. 101–116. Pohl W. (1998). Conception of Ethnicity in Early Medieval Studies. Debating the Middle Ages. Issues and Readings ed. Lester K. and B. H. Rosenwein. Pp. 15—24. Pow S. (2019). Nationes que se Tartaros appellant: An Exploration of the Historical Problem of the Usage of the Ethnonyms Tatar and Mongol in Medieval Sources. Zolotoordynskoe Obozrenie (Golden Horde Review). 7(3). Pp. 545–567. Qanungo S. N. (1965). Jaswant Rao Holkar: The Golden Rogue. Delhi: Abhinava-Bharati Printers & Publishers. Qazvini H. (1903). Târikhè gozîdè : les dynasties persanes pendant la période musulmane depuis des Saffârîdes jusques et y compris les Mogols de la Perse en 1330 de notre ère. P.: J. Maisonneuve et E. Guilmoto. Rachewiltz Igor de (1996). The Name of the Mongols in Asia and Europe: A Reappraisal. Actes de la 37e P.I.A.C. Conférence internationale permanente des études altaiques: Chantilly, 20–24 juin 1994. Etudes Mongoles et Sibériennes. Cahier 27. Pp. 199–210. Radulfus Cadomensis (1854). Gesta Tancredi principis in expedicione Hierosolyminata. Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Latina. Ed. J. Р. Migne. Garnier Frères. 155. Pp. 189–590. Raimundi de Aguilers (1866). Canonici Podiensis historia Francorum qui ceperunt Iherusalem. Recueil des historiens des croisades. Historiens occidentaux. ed. l’Académie royale des Inscriptions et belles-lettres. Imprimerie royale, III. Pp. 231–305. Ranade M. G. (1961). The Saints and Prophets of Maharashtra. Rise of The Maratha Power and Other Essays by M. G. Ranade, and Gleanings from Maratha Chronicles by K. T. Telang. Bombay: Univ. of Bombay. Pp. 78–92. Ravande M. B. (1998). Śrīgaṇudāsāyan (mahākāvya): (Santkavi śrīdāsgaṇū mahārāj: jivancaritra). Nanded: Shri Gautami prakashan. Ravandi M. (1921). Rahat as-sudur va ayat as-sorur. Leiden; L.: E. J. Brill. 300 Renmin wang [People’s Network] (2014). “Xu Lin Huoban Shuojie Ma Guoxian Guoji Jiang” [Xu Lin was awarded the first “Matteo Ripa International Award”]. (http://world.people. com.cn/n/2014/1021/c1002-25873059.html). Ricci M. (2001). Grand Dictionnaire Ricci de la Langue Chinoise. I–VI. Index. P.-Taibei. Ripa M. (1832). Storia Della Fondazione della Congregazione e del Collegio de’ Chinese sotto it Titolo della Sagra Famiglia di Gesù Cristo, Scritta dallo Stesso Fondatore Matteo Ripa e de’ Viaggi da Lui Fatti. In 3 Vols. Napoli: Manfredi. Ripa M. (1844). Memoirs of Father Ripa During Thirteen Years’ Residence at the Court of Peking in the Service of the Emperor of China: With an Account of the Foundation of the College for the Education of Young Chinese at Naples. L.: John Murray, Albemarle Street. Ripa M. (1991, 1996). Giornale (1705–1724). Critical article notes and documentary appendix by Michele Fatica. In 2 Vols. Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale. Rivinius K. J. (1990). The Boxer Movement and Christian Missions in China. Mission Studies. 7, 1. Pp. 189–217. Rule P. (1986). Kung-tzu or Confucius. The Jesuit Interpretation of Confucianism. Sydney/L./Boston: Allen & Unwin. Rule P. (2009). The Chinese Rites Controversy: Confucian and Christian Views on the Afterlife. Studies in Church History. 45. Pp. 280–300. Sacred Mandates (2018). Asian International Relations Since Chinggis Khan (Eds. T. Brook, M. Van Walt Van Praag, M. Boltjes). Chicago–L. Sahasrabuddhe R. (2016). Godātīrīcā śrīdāsgaṇu mahārāj. Mumbai: Punarvasu prakashan. San R., Miguel A. (2000). Cristianos Laicos en la Misión Dominicana del Norte de la Provincia de Fujian, China, en el siglo XVII [Lay Christians in the Dominican Mission of Northern Fujian Province, China, 17th century]. Rome: Pontificia Universitas Gregoriana. Sardesai G. S. (1948). New History of the Marathas. Vol. III. Bombay: Phoenix Publications. Sathaye A. A. (2015). Crossing the Lines of Caste: Visvamitra and the Construction of Brahmin Power in Hindu Mythology. Oxford–NY: Oxford University Press. Schulten C. (2017). A Solitary Place Suitable for Thinking. Chinese Works of Art. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://www.sothebys.com/en/articles/a-solitary-place-suitable-for-thinking. Schultz A. (2013). Singing a Hindu Nation: Marathi Devotional Performance and Nationalism. New York: Oxford University Press. Scott-Warings E. (1810). History of the Marhattoes. To which is Prefixed an Historical Sketch of the Decan: Containing a Short Account of the Rise and Fall of the Mooslim Sovereignties prior to the Æra of Mahratta Independence, by Edward Scott Waring, Author of a Tour to Sheeraz. L.: Royal Echange, 1810. Seah A. (2017). The 1670 Chinese Missal: A Struggle for Indigenization Amidst the Chinese Rites Controversy. A. E. Clark (ed.). China’s Christianity: From Missionary to Indigenous Church, Studies in Christian Mission. Leiden: Koninklijke Brill: 87–120. Serruys H. (1982). Mongгol: Moгal and Mangгus: Maгus. Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. 36. Fasc. 1/3. Pp. 475–484. Singh R. P. (1987). Geography and Politics in Central India: A Case Study of Erstwhile Indore State. New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company. Sinh R. (1998). (Ed.). Mohan Singh’s Waqai-Holkar / English translation by Jadunath Sarkar. Jaipur: Publication Scheme. Silver L. (2010). The Imperial Map. Cartography and the Mastery of Empire by James R. Akerman. The Art Book. 17. Pp. 44–45 (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8357.2010.01079_10.x). Shaughnessy E. L. (1980). “New” Evidence on the Zhou Conquest. Early China. 6. Pp. 57–79. 301 Shirwadkar S. (2012). Religion, Culture & Expression of Identity: Exploration of Subversion by Indian Women through Literature. Tamcke M., G. Jathanna (eds). Construction of the Other, Identification of the Self: German Mission in India. Wien– Berlin: LIT Verlag. Pp. 75–84. Slagle J. B. (1999). (Ed.). The Collected Letters of Joanna Baillie. Vol. 2. Cranbury (N.J.); London; Mississauga (Ontario): Associated University Press. Slagle J. B. (2002). Joanna Baillie. A Literary Life. Madison; Teaneck: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press; London: Associated University Press, 2002. Slagle J. B. (2012). Romantic Appropriation of History. The Legends of Joanna Baillie and Margaret Hodson. Madison; Teaneck: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press. Slagle J. B. (2013). Joanna Baillie and the Anxiety of Shakespear’s Influence. Borrowers and Lenders. The Journal of Shakespeare and Appropriation. Vol. 8. No. 1 [http://www.borrowers.uga.edu]. Snodgrass M. E. (2006). Encyclopedia of Feminist Literature. NY: Facts on File. Standaert N. (2018). Chinese Voices in the Rites Controversy: The Role of Christian Communities. Ines G. Županov and Pierre A. Fabre (eds.). The Rites Controversies in the Early Modern World. Leiden: Brill. Pp. 50–67. Sumberg L. A. (1959). The Tafurs and the First Crusade. Mediaeval Studies; 21.1. Pp. 224–246. Swami Ramananda Tirtha (1961). Memoirs of Hyderabad Freedom Struggle. Bombay: Popular prakashan. T̤ abakāt-i-Nāṣirı̄ : A General History of the Muhammadan Dynasties of Asia, Including Hindustan; from A.H. 194 (810 A.D.) to A.H. 658 (1260 A.D.) and the Irruption of the Infidel Mughals into Islam (1881). L.: Gilbert & Rivington. I–II. Takata T. (2012). Qianlong Emperor’s Copperplate Engravings of the “Conquest of Western Regions”. Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko. 70. Pp. 1–19. The Annual Register or a VIE of the History, Politics, and Literature, For the Year 1805. (1807). Vol. 47. London: J. Wright. Thorn W. (1818). Memoir of the War in India, Conducted by General Lord Lake, Commander-in-Chief, and Major-General Sir Arthur Wellesley, Duke of Wellington; From its Commencement in 1803, to Its Termination in 1806, on the Banks of the Hyphasis. L.: T. Edgerton, Millitary Library. Tone W. H. (1798). A Letter to an Officer on the Madras Establishment: Being an Attempt to Illustrate some Particular Institutions of the Marattha People; Principally Relative to Their System of War and Finance. Also an Account of the Political Changes of the Empire, in the Year 1796, as Published in the Bombay Courier, by William Henry Tone, Commanding a Regiment of Infantry, in the Service of the Peshwa. Bombay: The Courier Press. Treadgold D. W. (1973). The West in Russia and China: Religious and Secular Thought in Modern Times. NY: Cambridge University Press. Tucker H. St. G. (Kaye John William, ed.) (1853). Memorials of Indian Government; Being a Selection from the Papers of Henry St. George Tucker, Late Director of the East India Company. L.: Richard Bentley. Tudebod P. (1866). História de Hierosolymitano Itinere. Recueil des historiens des croisades. Historiens occidentaux. III. Pp. 1–119. un-Nesevi, Ahmed Şehabeddin (1934). Celaluttin Harezеmşah. İstanbul: Devlet Matbaasi. Vampelj Suhadolnik N. (2015). European Jesuits in China: The Importance of the Jesuits for the Cultural and Scientific Development of European and Chinese Society. Asian Studies 5. 2: 5–9. https://doi.org/10.4312/as.2015.3.2.5-9. Viani S., Mezzabarba C. A. (1739). Istoria delle Cose Operate nella China da Monsignor Gio. Ambrogio Mezzabarba Patriarca d’Alessandria, Legato Appostolico in uell’Impero, e di Presente Vescovo di Lodi, Scritta dal Padre Viani Suo Confessore e Compagno nella Predetta 302 Legazione [History of Things Operated in China by Monsignor Gio. Ambrogio Mezzabarba Patriarch of Alexandria, Apostolic Legate in that Empire, and Present Bishop of Lodi, Written by Fr. Viani His Confessor and Companion in the Aforementioned Legation]. P.: Monsù Briasson. Villarroel F. (1993). The Chinese Rites Controversy: Dominican Viewpoint. Philippina Sacra. 28, 82. Pp. 5–61. Vincent de Beauvais (1624). Bibliotheca mundi Vincentii Burgundi. Duaci: Ex Officina Typographica Baltazaris Belleri. 4. 1389 p. Voegelin E. (1941). The Mongol Orders of Submission to the European Powers, 1245–1255. Byzantion. XV. Pp. 378–413. Von Collani C. (2001). Legations and Travelers. N. Standaert (ed.). Handbook of Christianity in China. Vol. 1: 635–1800. Leiden – Boston – Köln: Brill. Pp. 355–366. Walravens H. (1997). “Copper-Engraving in China: The First Chinese-European CoOperative Project in the Field of Art.” Art Libraries Journal. 22. Pp. 16–19. https://doi. org/10.1017/S0307472200010269. Wang Tao (1996). Colour Terms in Shang oracle bone Inscriptions. Bulletin of SOAS. 59. Pp. 63–101. Warren F. M. (1914). The Enamoured Moslem Princess in Orderic Vital and the French Epic. Publications of the Modern Language Association of America. 29. Pp. 341–358. Wilkinson E. (2000). Chinese History: A Manual. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Woodside A. (1988). Vietnam and the Chinese Model: A Comparative Study of Nguyen and Chinese Civil Government in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century. Cambridge (MA) – L.: Harvard Univ. Press. Yangzi wanbao wang [Yangzi Evening News Network] (2020). Li Tiangang Zhongguo Liyi Zhizheng Zhihoude Diyidai Xifang Hanxuejia [Li Tiangang: The First Generation of Western Sinologists after the Chinese Rites Controversy]. (https://www.yangtse.com/zncontent/275695. html). Yoshihiro Ishikawa (2003). Anti-Manchu Racism and the Rise of Anthropology in Early 20th Century China. Sino-Japanese Studies (15). Pp. 7–26. Zastoupil L. (1994). John Stuart Mill and India. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Zastoupil L. (1999). India, J.S. Mill, and ‘Western’ Culture. Moir Martin, Peers Doughlas M., Zastoupil L. (eds). J.S. Mill’s Encounter with India. Toronto; Buffalo; L.: University of Toronto Press. Zhao G. (2006). Reinventing China: Imperial Qing Ideology and the Rise of Modern Chinese National Identity in the Early 20th Century. Modern China. 32 (1). Zhu Qianzhi, Xianian Huang (2002). Zhu Qianzhi Wenji [Anthology of Zhu Qianzhi]. Vol. 10. Fujian jiaoyu chubanshe [Fujian Education Press] (in Chinese).