{"title":"Летопись хоринских бурят Рабжи Санжиева: предварительные сведения","authors":"M. V. Ayusheeva, T︠s︡. P. Vanchikova","doi":"10.22162/2500-1523-2022-3-578-592","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. The introduction of new sources characterizing traditions of Buryat chronicle writing into scientific circulation remains an urgent task of Mongolian studies. Dozens of works and their various copies and editions are still there to be explored. The article precedes a further study and translation of a voluminous historical chronicle of the Aga and Khori Buryats. Goals. The study attempts a brief overview of the chronicle’s contents and approaches some peculiarities traced in its text. Materials and methods. The analysis of Rabzhi Sanzhiev’s writing involves a wide range of Buryat historical works — both chronicles and archival documents. The historical comparative and chronological methods prove instrumental in systematizing the data contained, while tools of textual and source studies have made it possible to delineate the author’s text proper. Results. The work identifies an extensive range of sources and the chronicle’s structure according to which R. Sanzhiev’s narrative be conventionally divided into a number of large sections, namely: Shirab-Nimbu Khobituev’s chronicle; copies of official documents; historical works by T. Toboev, D. Zayaev, S. Vandanov, A. Ochirov; and the author’s text. Conclusions. R. Sanzhiev’s writing is a major work of the historical documentary genre. The author undertook painstaking efforts to meticulously clarify data included in Shirab-Nimbu Khobituev’s chronicle and supplement certain facts and data, introduce additional findings from various sources. The continuation of Khobituev’s chronicle — despite the compiled facts are fragmented enough — acts as an independent composition. Archival documents on the history of Buryat self-governance and Buddhism, folklore texts, chronicles and legends included by the author into the narrative are of particular value.","PeriodicalId":33928,"journal":{"name":"Mongolovedenie","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mongolovedenie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22162/2500-1523-2022-3-578-592","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction. The introduction of new sources characterizing traditions of Buryat chronicle writing into scientific circulation remains an urgent task of Mongolian studies. Dozens of works and their various copies and editions are still there to be explored. The article precedes a further study and translation of a voluminous historical chronicle of the Aga and Khori Buryats. Goals. The study attempts a brief overview of the chronicle’s contents and approaches some peculiarities traced in its text. Materials and methods. The analysis of Rabzhi Sanzhiev’s writing involves a wide range of Buryat historical works — both chronicles and archival documents. The historical comparative and chronological methods prove instrumental in systematizing the data contained, while tools of textual and source studies have made it possible to delineate the author’s text proper. Results. The work identifies an extensive range of sources and the chronicle’s structure according to which R. Sanzhiev’s narrative be conventionally divided into a number of large sections, namely: Shirab-Nimbu Khobituev’s chronicle; copies of official documents; historical works by T. Toboev, D. Zayaev, S. Vandanov, A. Ochirov; and the author’s text. Conclusions. R. Sanzhiev’s writing is a major work of the historical documentary genre. The author undertook painstaking efforts to meticulously clarify data included in Shirab-Nimbu Khobituev’s chronicle and supplement certain facts and data, introduce additional findings from various sources. The continuation of Khobituev’s chronicle — despite the compiled facts are fragmented enough — acts as an independent composition. Archival documents on the history of Buryat self-governance and Buddhism, folklore texts, chronicles and legends included by the author into the narrative are of particular value.
介绍。将具有布里亚特编年史传统特征的新来源引入科学流通仍然是蒙古研究的紧迫任务。许多作品及其各种副本和版本仍有待探索。这篇文章在进一步研究和翻译阿迦和科里布里亚特的大量历史编年史之前。的目标。本研究试图对编年史的内容进行简要概述,并探讨其文本中的一些特点。材料和方法。对Rabzhi Sanzhiev写作的分析涉及广泛的布里亚特历史作品-包括编年史和档案文件。历史比较和时间顺序方法证明有助于将所包含的数据系统化,而文本和来源研究的工具使描述作者的文本成为可能。结果。这项工作确定了广泛的来源和编年史的结构,根据r.s anzhiev的叙述通常分为许多大的部分,即:shabb - nimbu Khobituev的编年史;官方文件副本;T. Toboev, D. Zayaev, S. Vandanov, A. Ochirov的历史著作;以及作者的文本。结论。桑日耶夫的作品是历史纪实题材的重要作品。作者付出了艰苦的努力,精心澄清Shirab-Nimbu Khobituev编年史中的数据,补充某些事实和数据,介绍来自各种来源的其他发现。霍比图耶夫编年史的延续——尽管汇编的事实足够碎片化——作为一个独立的组成部分。关于布里亚特自治和佛教历史的档案文件、民间传说文本、编年史和传说都是作者纳入叙事的特别价值。