It is the book about a historical idea in the Middle East.
Predisloviye: V nochnoy tishi, pogloshchayushchey i ustranyayushchey vsemelochnoye i suyetnoye v povsednevnoy zhizni cheloveka, Umrishchev — odin iz personazhey povesti A. P. Platonova «Yuvenil'noye more» — «okhotno otdaval mysl' lyuboy dalekoy perspektive, lish' by ona nakhodilas' na sto let vperedi ili na stol'ko zhe nazad» [Povesti. 1988, s. 292], a v lesnoy glushi, gde chelovek nayedine s prirodoy, lesnoy nadziratel' iz romana «Chevengur» (1988, s. 139) «sidel nad starinnymi knigami. On iskal sovetskomu vremeni podobiya v proshlom, chtoby uznat' dal'neyshuyu muchitel'nuyu sud'bu revolyutsii i nayti iskhod dlya spaseniya svoyey sem'i». V oboikh sluchayakh pered nami chelovek, osvobodivshiysya ili osvobozhdennyy ot vsego privkhodyashchego i nanosnogo, chelovek «voobshche», «kak takovoy», sushchnostnym vidovym priznakom kotorogo, kak schitayet A. P. Platonov, yavlyayetsya pamyat'. Otnyud' ne rassmatrivaya pamyat', opredelyayemuyu kak protsessy organizatsii i sokhraneniya proshlogo opyta, chto delayet vozmozhnym yego povtornoye ispol'zovaniye v deyatel'nosti ili vozvrashcheniye v sferu soznaniya, v kachestve yedinstvennogo ili osnovnogo vidovogo priznaka cheloveka, sleduyet soglasit'sya s temi issledovatelyami [Deonna. 1922, s. 10; Levada. 1969, s. 193; Barg. 1987, s. 5 i sl.; Antipov. 1987, s. 89, i dr.], kotoryye priznayut sposobnost' cheloveka, a glavnoye - yego potrebnost' vspominat' proshloye sushchnostnym i neobkhodimym svoystvom cheloveka i chelovechestva. Odnako zainteresovannost' v proshlom, istoricheskiy interes — velichina ne postoyannaya, a peremennaya, tak kak intensivnost' yego mozhet byt' bol'shey ili men'shey. Osoboy aktivnost'yu istoricheskiy interes otlichayetsya vo vremena perelomnyye, dramaticheskiye v zhizni obshchestva, narodov i stran, a nashe vremya — konets XX v. — imenno takaya epokha, epokha [4] gamletovskogo «Byt' ili ne byt'?» My povsemestno nablyudayem povyshennyy, ostryy interes k proshlomu, k istorii, kotoryy vyrazhayetsya, odnako, neodinakovo i neodnoznachno. Amplituda kolebaniy ogromnaya — ot polnogo otritsaniya proshlogo do preobladayushchego okhranitel'stva, ot popytok zabveniya proshlogo do pogruzheniya v nego. Yesli pervoye otnosheniye k proshlomu vyzyvayet k zhizni fenomen mankurta, ne znavshego, «kto on, otkuda rodom-plemenem, ne vedal svoyego imeni, ne pomnil detstva, ottsa i materi — odnim slovom, mankurt ne osoznaval sebya chelovecheskim sushchestvom» [Aytmatov. 1980, s. 414], to vtoroye porozhdayet yego antipoda-dvoynika, antimankurta. Takoy antimankurt znayet svoye proiskhozhdeniye, pomnit svoye detstvo, ottsa i mat', no, ne znaya i ne zhelaya znat' svoyego nastoyashchego, takzhe lishayet sebya chelovecheskoy sushchnosti. Kak eto ni banal'no, no nyne prikhoditsya vnov' i vnov' napominat', chto chelovek - sushchestvo istoricheskoye, kotoroye poznayet sebya tol'ko v khode istorii i posredstvom istorii [Barg. 1982, s. 50]. Drugoye soobrazheniye, takzhe posluzhivsheye dlya avtora pobuditel'nym motivom, svyazano so spetsificheskoy osobennost'yu istoricheskoy nauki, sostoyashchey v tom, chto istorik, kak pravilo, ne vstrechayetsya neposredstvenno s predmetom svoyego izucheniya — chelovekom i chelovecheskim obshchestvom proshlogo, a znakomitsya s nimi lish' po ostavlennym imi sledam , t.ye. po istoricheskim istochnikam. Bol'shinstvo istochnikov, osobenno pis'mennyye, fiksiruyut sobytiye ili yavleniye uzhe post factum, posle togo, kak ono proizoshlo, chto obuslovlivayet neizbezhnoye i neobkhodimoye otnosheniye k nemu, yego osmysleniye i otsenku tem, kto osushchestvlyayet fiksatsiyu dannogo sobytiya ili yavleniya. Poetomu vyyavleniye spetsifiki vospriyatiya i osmysleniya chelovekom proshlogo svoyey istorii predstavlyayet soboy vazhnuyu predposylku istinnosti i deystvennosti sovremennoy istoricheskoy nauki, perezhivayushchey vmeste so vsem nashim obshchestvom trudnuyu poru pereotsenki tsennostey. Chasto zvuchashchiye v nastoyashcheye vremya obvineniya istoricheskoy nauki v kon"yunkturnosti, a inogda — v soznatel'noy fal'sifikatsii, v prednamerennom sozdanii «zon molchaniya» i «belykh pyaten», v nepozvolitel'noy modernizatsii proshlogo i predvzyatosti, v dogmatizme i zastoynosti, v otstavanii ot zaprosov [5] vremeni i urovnya drugikh nauk vo mnogom spravedlivy. No vstayet trevozhnyy vopros: yavlyayutsya li eti poroki osobennostyami tol'ko nyneshnego sostoyaniya istoricheskoy nauki ili yeye immanentnymi svoystvami? Etot vopros i poiski otveta na nego zastavlyayut s pristal'nym vnimaniyem vsmatrivat'sya v proshloye samoy nauki, v istoriyu istorii, obrashchayas' pri etom ne tol'ko k N. M. Karamzinu, S. M. Solov'yevu, V. O. Klyuchevskomu, no takzhe k istoricheskoy nauke i istorikam boleye otdalennogo proshlogo, v tom chisle drevnego Blizhnego Vostoka. Istoriya — vsegda dialog mezhdu nastoyashchim i proshlym, mezhdu epokhami i pokoleniyami, i «kazhdaya epokha vybirayet sebe v proshlom, inogda osoznanno, inogda stikhiyno, traditsii, blizkiye yey po dukhu, sluzhashchiye korrelyatom yeye opyta» [Zavadskaya. 1970, s. 5]. Mnogiye fakty — uvlechennost' vostochnymi religiozno-filosofskimi i etiko-esteticheskimi ucheniyami, populyarnost' vostochnogo slovesnogo i izobrazitel'nogo iskusstva i t. d. — govoryat o tom, chto v otlichiye ot cheloveka XVIII-XIX vv., dlya kotorogo korrelyatom yego opyta byla klassicheskaya antichnost' [ Mikhaylov. 1988, s. 308-324], chelovek kontsa XX v. v poiskakh sobesednika vse chashche obrashchayetsya k Vostoku, osobenno k drevnemu Vostoku. Perechislennyye soobrazheniya podvodyat k mysli o tselesoobraznosti postanovki trekh osnovnykh voprosov: sushchestvovala li na Blizhnem Vostoke serediny I tysyacheletiya do n. e. istoricheskaya mysl', a yesli ona sushchestvovala, to chto zanimalo yeye nositeley v ikh sobstvennom proshlom i kak oni osmyslyali eto svoye proshloye? Trud sovremennogo istorika, kstati, kak i trud yego dalekogo predshestvennika, nosit v printsipe individual'nyy kharakter, chto ne oznachayet keleynosti, otgorozhennosti ot vneshnego mira. Naoborot, individual'nyy trud istorika predpolagal, vidimo, v drevnosti i bessporno predpolagayet v nastoyashcheye vremya neobkhodimyy obmen mneniyami, obsuzhdeniya i t. d. Etim ya vospol'zovalsya po mere vozmozhnosti i iskrenne blagodaren svoim kollegam, osobenno I. M. D'yakonovu i I. S. Sventsitskoy, za kriticheskiye zamechaniya i konstruktivnyye sovety, a moyey zhene - L. A. Veynberg — za ponimaniye i podderzhku. Opubl.: Veynberg I.P. Rozhdeniye istorii. Istoricheskaya mysl' na Blizhnem Vostoke serediny I tysyacheletiya do n.e. M.: Nauka, 1993. SODERZHANIYe PREDISLOVIYe 3 Glava I. PGOBLEMA, KATEGORII, ISTOCHNIKI 6 Glava II. SEREDINA I TYSYACHELETIYA DO N. E.— VREMYA PEREMEN NA BLIZHNEM VOSTOKE 28 Glava III. BLIZHNEVOSTOCHNYY AVTOR-«ISTO-RIOPISETS», YEGO ISTOCHNIKI I METODY 56 1. Blizhnevostochnyy istoriopisets i istoricheskaya traditsiya 57 2. «Sobstvennyy material»: yego soderzhaniye i naznacheniye. 66 3. Delimitatsiya i delimitatory v blizhnevostochnom istoriopisanii 75 4. Ustnoye i pis'mennoye slovo, pryamaya i povestvovatel'naya rech' v blizhnevostochnom istoriopisanii 82 5. Deystviye—glavnaya pruzhina blizhnevostochnogo istoriopisaniya 94 Glava IV. MODEL' MIRA BLIZHNEVOSTOCHNOGO ISTORIOPISTSA 101 1. Puti vossozdaniya modeli mira blizhnevostochnogo istoriopistsa 101 2. Priroda v blizhnevostochnom istoriopisanii 105 3. Blizhnevostochnyy istoriopisets o veshchi i veshchnoy deyatel'nosti cheloveka 116 4. Chelovek i lyudskiye obshchnosti — ikh mesto i rol' v istoricheskom protsesse 126 5. Tsarstvennost', tsarstvo i tsar' v istoricheskom protsesse 163 6. Mesto i rol' mira bozhestvennogo v istoricheskom protsesse 205 7. Prostranstvo i vremya v modeli mira blizhnevostochnogo Istoriopistsa 264 Glava V. BLIZHNEVOSTOCHNYY ISTORIOPISETS I ISTORIZM 289 1. Blizhnevostochnyy istoriopisets i yego auditoriya 289 2. Byl li blizhnevostochnoy istoricheskoy mysli znakom istorizm? 307 POSLESLOVIYe 316 SPISOK SOKRASHCHENIY 319 SPISOK TSITIRUYEMYKH RABOT 321 UKAZATEL' DREVNIKH IMEN, GEOGRAFICHESKIKH I ETNICHESKIKH NAZVANIY 340 PREDMETNYY UKAZATEL' 345 SUMMARY 350
Preface :
In the still of the night , absorbing and eliminating vsemelochnoe and vanity of everyday life , Umrischev - one of the characters in the novel AP Platonov , " The juvenile sea " - " willingly gave any thought long run , as long as it was a hundred years ahead , or as many is back "[ Tale . 1988, p. 292 ] and in the woods , where a man at one with nature , the forest warden of the novel " Chevengur " (1988 , p. 139) " sat over the old books. He was looking for the Soviet era similarity in the past to find out further agonizing fate of the revolution and find the outcome to save his family. " In both cases, the person in front of us , freed or liberated from all circumstantial and superficial, man "in general" , "as such" , the essential feature of which species , according to AP Platonov, is memory. Far from viewing memory , defined as the processes of the organization and preservation of past experience , which makes it possible to re-use in the work or return the sphere of consciousness, as the sole or main characteristic of human species , one has to agree with the researchers [Deonna. 1922, p . 10 ; Levada . 1969, p. 193; Barg . 1987, p. 5 et seq. ; Antipov . 1987, p. 89, etc. ] , which recognize the ability of a person , and most importantly - his need to reminisce the essential and necessary property rights and humanity.
However, interest in the past, historical interest - is not a constant but a variable , because the intensity of it may be more or less . Especially active historical interest differs in crucial times , dramatic in the life of society , nations and countries, and our time - the end of the XX century. - It is this era , the era of
[4 ]
Hamlet's "To be or not to be? " We are seeing increased everywhere , keen interest in the past , the history of which is expressed , however, is variable and ambiguous. The amplitude of the oscillation huge - from complete denial of the past to the prevailing ohranitelstva from trying to oblivion of the past before plunging into it. If the first relationship to the past brings to life the phenomenon mankurt who did not know "who he is , where I came from , the tribe did not know his name, did not remember his childhood , his father and mother - in a word, mankurt not realize himself a human being " [ Aitmatov . 1980, p . 414 ] , the latter gives rise to its antipode - double, antimankurta . This antimankurt knows its origin, remembers his childhood , his father and mother , but not knowing and not wanting to know his real , also deprives itself of the human essence . It may seem trite , but now have time and again to remind you that people - being historical , which knows itself only in the course of history and stories through [ Barg . 1982, p. 50 ] .
Another consideration also served as an incentive for the author to be associated with a specific feature of the historical science , which consists in the fact that the historian , as a rule , does not occur directly with the subject of his study - a man and a human society of the past, and meets with them on a trail left by them , i.e. according to historical sources . Most sources , especially in writing , fix an event or phenomenon is post factum, after it had taken place , resulting in an inevitable and necessary relation to him, his understanding and assessment of those who carry out the fixation of the event or phenomenon. Therefore, the identification and understanding of the perception of a man past his history is an important prerequisite for the truth and effectiveness of modern historical science, going through with the whole of our society difficult time revaluation of values.
Often sounding currently charges of historical science in opportunism , and sometimes - in a conscious fraud , the deliberate creation of a " zone of silence " and "white spots" in the past and unaffordable modernization bias and dogmatism and stagnation in the backlog of requests
[5 ]
time and level of other sciences are largely justified . But there is a disturbing question : are these features only flaws of the current state of historical science or its immanent properties ? This question and finding the answer to make it with close attention to peer into the past of the science , the history of history , referring here not only to NM Karamzin , SM Solovyov, VOKljuchevskogo , but also to history historians and the more distant past, including the ancient Near East.
History - always a dialogue between the present and the past, between eras and generations , and " each era chooses in the past, sometimes consciously, sometimes spontaneously , traditions, and are close to it in spirit , serving the correlate of her experience," [ Zavadskaja . 1970. 5]. Many of the facts - passion Eastern religious and philosophical , ethical and aesthetic exercise , the popularity of the east , both verbal and visual arts , etc. - suggests that, unlike the human XVIII-XIX centuries . , For which correlate his experience was the classical antiquity [ Mikhailov . 1988, p. 308-324 ] , one end of the XX century. in search of a companion is increasingly turning to the East, especially to the ancient East.
The listed reasons are led to the idea of staging the feasibility of three main issues: whether there was in the Middle East, the middle of I millennium BC. e . historical thought , and if it existed , what interested her in the media of their own past and how they conceptualized it's his past ?
The work of the contemporary historian , by the way , as the work of his distant predecessor, is , in principle, individual character , that does not mean secretiveness , separated from the outside world. On the contrary, individual labor historians suggest , apparently, in ancient times, and undoubtedly involves at present the necessary exchange of views , discussions, etc. This I took as much as possible and sincerely grateful to my colleagues , particularly IM Dyakonov and I. Sventsitsky for constructive criticism and advice, and my wife - L. Weinberg - for your understanding and support.
Publ . : Weinberg IP Birth stories . Historical thought in the Middle East, the middle of I millennium BC Moscow: Nauka , 1993 .
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 3
Chapter I. PGOBLEMA , category, 6 SOURCES
Chapter II. I MEAN TO MILLENNIUM NE - TIME FOR CHANGE IN THE MIDDLE EAST 28
Chapter III. MIDDLE EAST AUTHOR " ISTO- RIOPISETS " ITS SOURCES AND METHODS 56
1. The Middle East and the historical tradition of istoriopisets 57
2 . " Own stuff ": its content and purpose. 66
3 . Delimitation and the writing of history in the Middle East delimitatory 75
4 . Spoken and written word , direct and narrative speech writing of history in the Middle East 82
5 . Action - mainspring of history in the Middle East 94
Chapter IV. MODEL OF THE MIDDLE EAST PEACE ISTORIOPISTSA 101
1. Ways to recreate the model of the world in the Middle East istoriopistsa 101
2 . The nature of the writing of history in the Middle East 105
3 . The Middle East istoriopisets of things and a material of human activity 116
4 . Person and human community - their place and role in the historical process 126
5 . Kingship , the king of the kingdom, and in the historical process 163
6. The place and role of the divine in the world historical process 205
7. Space and time in the model of the Middle East peace Istoriopistsa 264
Chapter V. MIDDLE EAST AND ISTORIOPISETS HISTORICISM 289
1. Istoriopisets Middle East and its audience 289
2 . Was the Middle East historical thought historicism familiar ? 307
EPILOGUE 316
List of Acronyms 319
List of cited works 321
INDEX OF ANCIENT NAMES , NAMES OF GEOGRAPHIC AND ETHNIC 340
INDEX 345
SUMMARY 350
English
Russian
