Introduction. The problem of social integration of borderlands’ territories into the order of the Russian Empire has always been relevant and most discussed in the study of empires. In recent decades, within the framework of the «imperial turn», the issue of the unity of the centre and periphery, peculiarities of their relations become priority areas in this field. Today the historians are trying to solve the problem of recreating the natural, historical development of the Russian Empire, which «grew» with numerous borderlands and represented a full section of socio-cultural layers and estates.
Modern concepts of studying the Russian empire as multinational, multiconfessional, allow revealing the features, methods, and models of regional integration, determining the role of each region in imperial reality and identifying all forms of relations between the centre and the periphery in a whole picture. This problem has been the beginning of the study of regions in all aspects. Besides, the comparative-historical approach to the problem allows not only to compare the process of entry of nomadic peoples (Bashkirs, Kalmyks, and others) into the estate order of the empire but also to determine the place of the Kazakh steppe in the history of the empire. Therefore, the theme is of great international importance, as it corresponds to modern world concepts of history study and presents a new perspective of study multinational Russian nobility.
The Kazakh steppe in the 19th centurybecame the socio-political component of the empire, transforming the traditional ruling system.The study of social changes in the Steppe on the example of the features of the formation of the Kazakh nobility allows us tosee acompletely different form of social incorporation of Kazakh nomads into the privileged estate of the Russian Empire. Noteworthy, the formation of social estates is a vexed continuously question in the history of the Russian Empire, and studying the process in Kazakh steppe territory is essential to understanding imperial diversity.
The Russian Empire in the process of reforming the Kazakh steppe used mechanisms of a complex interaction between «traditional» and «new» which accompanied by a transformation of the content of both, change of emphasis in both. The new administrative system in the Kazakh steppe and the inclusion of representatives of the Kazakh people in this process created conditions for the beginning of the transformation of the social organization of the Kazakh nomadic society and the formation of Kazakh nobility and the transition from clan ties based on kinship and patronage to awareness of new priorities in the structure of the social space of the Empire. It raises questions of a methodological nature, namely, what is the relationship between the formation of Kazakh nobility and the process of creating new thinking, perception of its new position in the system of nomadic society, attributes, symbols of power received from the Empire.
Despite curiosity and the importance of the problem, this theme is hardly studied in the world and domestic historical science. Some aspects of the problem of Kazakh nobility presented in historical works on the general history of Kazakhs of the 19th century, Kazakh officials, about historical personalities of the 19th century. In the world and Kazakh historical science, there were no attempts to study the formation and character of the Kazakh nobility in the context of social incorporation of the Kazakh steppe in the Russian Empire. Moreover, the topic itself will destroy erroneous beliefs about the non-existence of Kazakh nobility and the closure of nomadic Kazakh society during the imperial period. In the presented article, we will consider some aspects of the Kazakh nobility by investigating main works about the political and social history of the Kazakh steppe in the 19th century.
Sources and materials. The article is about the degree of studying the Kazakh nobility and focuses on analyzing main historical works of Kazakh, Russian and foreign scientists about political and social structures in the Kazakh steppe within the imperial period. For this reason, the source of the article contends of historical works and historical materials devoting to Kazakh history of the 19th century.
Discussian and results. This theme is unknown and unstudied in world historiography, as well as in Russian and Kazakh historical science. What was the reason for it?
- the suggestion that the Kazakh nobility did not exist;
- limitations of Soviet historical science in study traditional aristocracy of Kazakhs;
-the lack of enough materials and documents to investigate this theme as a problem.
Weconsider any historical works, which related to the problem of the Kazakh nobility through chronological order such categories as the Pre-revolution period, Soviet period, and post-Soviet period.
The Kazakh nobility has not been a separate subject in historical study. Nowadays several aspects of this theme present in historical works about Kazakh history, inquiries in Kazakh officials or some representatives of the Kazakh nobility was studied as a historical person, but without his noble status (for example, works about Chokan Valikhanov, Baimukhamed Aishuakov, Gubaidulla Chingizkhan, and others).
Therefore, it is necessary to study historical works that indirectly relate to the history of the Kazakh nobles. These works we divide according to problems of studying in the following way: focused in the Russian nobility in general, general works on the Kazakh history within the empire, the social transformation of the Steppe in the 19th century, the history of Kazakh officials, and biographical works about the representatives of the Kazakh nobles.
Extensive information about the entry of the Kazakh elite and social transformation in the Kazakh society demonstrated in the works of Imperial authors devoted to the history of the Kazakh steppe. In their works Lev Lavrentievich Meyer (Meyer, 1865), Alexandr Ivanovich Dobrosmyslov (Dobrosmyslov, 1902), Ivan Ivanovich Kraft (Kraft, 1900) considered the social structure of the Kazakh society before the reforms of the early 19th century and changes in it in the post-reform period. In the context of these transformations, the authors mentioned the intermediary role of Kazakh sultans and provided biographical information about some sultans who were representatives of the Kazakh nobility. In work «From the Kirghiz past», Ivan Kraft tried to define the elite groups of the Kazakh nomadic society - sultans, tarkhans, biys. In this work, the sultans he characterized as «the descendants of the Kyrgyz khans who called Sultans. Upon the entry of the Kirghiz into Russian citizenship, the sons of Khan Abulkhair, Erali, Nurali, Khozha-Ahmet, and Aychuvak, sultan Erali, who participated with his father Khan Abulkhair and representatives of the people in taking the oath to Russia, was as well as the children and nephews of the latter, in all the highest diplomas and decrees, were called sultans given the honours befitting the children of sovereign persons»(Kraft, 1900: 80-83).
In his work, Alexandr Dobrosmyslov considered sultans as the primary mediators between the imperial administration and the Kazakh people in the process of transformation of the political and social organization of the Kazakh society. He also noted the critical role of the Tatars in the entry process of the Kazakh steppe into the imperial system in this way: «... policy towards the Kyrgyz, both during the time preceding Catherine II, and in her time and for a long time after, was the same, or in other words, what we Russians themselves could not settle with the Kirgiz, the Tatars settled. .... Russians were tamed with the help of the Tatars and Bashkirs, made citizens of the Russian Empire, and then, when this was achieved, it was already possible to plant among them and Russian culture» (Dobrosmyslov, 1902: 375). Tatars played a significant role in the entry of representatives of the Kazakh society into the Russian official's system, and then in the introduction of a new social order in the Kazakh society. Dobrosmyslov presented the political transformations in the Steppe and the main legislative acts on the political governance of the Steppe. He examined in detail the Approved Opinion of the Asiatic committee in 1824 and published in full the Statute of 1844 (Dobrosmyslov, 1902: 397). In General, Dobrosmyslov carefully described the political situation of the Kazakh steppe in stages, paying in some cases attention to the personalities of the sultans-rulers. Lev Meyer, in his work, gave descriptive information about the Kazakh society. However, he had a little less information about Kazakh officials. It is noteworthy that the authors did not consider the sultans in these cases as nobles.
In general, the historiography of the pre-revolutionary period characterized by the accumulation of material and descriptions of historical events associated with the Kazakh society. All of the above works are descriptive and superficially describe the transformation in the Kazakh steppe. Pre-revolutionary authors Meyer, Dobrosmyslov, Kraft tried to present the history of the Kazakh people and their current situation in the Steppe in an informative form, to introduce the Russian authorities to the Kazakh steppe. These authors contacted Kazakh officials or nobles, whom the authors described, tried to give a positive assessment of the changes in the Steppe, resulted in political acts of imperial power. In these works, there are some essential points about the process of incorporation of Kazakhs into the imperial order, about the personalities of the Kazakh nobles, about changes in social relations of the Kazakh nomadic society.
Soviet historiography developed under the auspices of Marxist theory, according to which the key in social relations was the class struggle. In this regard, in the works of Soviet authors, the nobility acted as the ruling class and characterized by a narrow and limited scope of problems. Historians of the Soviet period described and gave an unambiguously critical assessment to representatives of nobility in General, and in particular, to the Kazakh officials and nobles. Sanjar Asfendiyarov, Ermakhan Bekmakhanov, Salyk Zimanov were historians who tried to consider social changes in the nomadic Kazakh society of the Empire period.
Kazakh researchers of Soviet period, Sanzhar Asfendiyarov, Salyk Zimanov (Zimanov, 2009) in their works consecrated the socio-political system of traditional Kazakh society, as well as the transformations that took place in it as a result of reforms of the early 19 century. In the context of the study of social relations of this period, the authors mentioned the problem of incorporation of the Kazakh elite into the privileged imperial estates. The pioneer in considering the problem of entry of Kazakhs into the social system of tsarist Russia was the Kazakh scientist Sanzhar Asfendiyarov, who was the first in Kazakh historiography who wrote about the role of integration of elites and gave some description of the features of the new estates among the Kazakhs of the 19th century. His book was published in 1935 and then reprinted. In the chapter «Policy of tsarism in the period of conquest», the author noted that the policy of attracting the Kazakh aristocracy towards the tsarist government was as important as the military measure. The scientist argued the importance of integration of elites in the strengthening of imperial power and unification of all territories of Empire, thus: «initially tsarism, besides full capture by force, carried out measures of bribery of the Kazakh khans and feudal aristocracy (sultans) through which intended to fix the domination in the steppe and to provide trade routes to Central Asia. Moreover, the latter concern, as is evident from the quotations given, occupies a huge place in all measures taken» (Asfendiyarov, 1993: 150). Such statements of Sanzhar Asfendiyarov have similarities with the opinion of Kelly O'Neill, who remarks, imperial officials initially appear willing to accept the local definition of social categories, but as the years pass and the security of the frontier improves they become less willing to accommodate particularities (O’Neill, 2010: 400).
Thus, Sanzhar Asfendiyarov pointed out the main vectors of social policy in the Steppe. At the same time, the author correctly described the flexibility and peculiar stage of imperial policy: «the Policy of tsarism developed depending on the situation: the khans were supported as long as they could help strengthen the tsarist power; as the contradictions of interests between the various groups of feudal lords, tsarism takes a stake in the elimination of the Khan's power and strengthening the feudal aristocracy to strengthen the power of Russian officials. In the Kazakh steppe, tsarism liquidated the power of the feudal aristocracy and relied on carrying out its policy on tribal, feudal lords, semi-feudal lords, and baystvo (aksakals, elders and biys), creating social support from the resettlement of the Cossack Russian peasants» (Asfendiyarov, 1993: 147-148). Also interesting are Asfendiyarov's remarks that tsarism relied on the elimination of the feudal Kazakh aristocracy, not recognizing it as a noble estate, and acquiring the rights of the privileged estate do not cease to be natives, but only acquire unique advantages, which based on General laws assigned to the newly acquired state (Asfendiyarov, 1993: 177). The significance of the work of Sanzhar Asfendiyarov for our study is high, because, for the first time in Kazakh historiography, he paid attention to the problem of social incorporation of the Kazakh steppe into estate order of the empire, and secondly, he remarked about the existence of the Kazakh nobility and honoured citizenship among Kazakhs.
Dr. Ermakhan Bekmakhanov studied the dynamics of social changes in the categories of sultans, biys, Khojas and mullahs, bais, tarkhans, batyrs (Bekmakhanov, 1957: 158-160). In his work, Ermakhan Bekmakhanov presented a detailed analysis of the traditional Kazakh society: how the Kazakh nomadic society divided, what were the rights of a particular social group, what were the relations between these social groups. Furthermore, he considered transformations in the Kazakh society with the entered Imperial reforms; allocated changes in administration and formations of the Kazakh officials. About the Kazakh nobility, Ermakhan Bekmakhanov did not mention and did not attach particular importance to this estate. His attention was more focused on the destruction of the traditional characteristics of Kazakh society.
Dr. Salyk Zimanov made a significant contribution to the study of the social structure and economic activity of the Kazakh population in the Imperial period. Salyk Zimanov considered Kazakh sultans as a social category of exploiters and a privileged social group in the nomadic Kazakh society, who attracted to the service of the tsarist government. Describing the functions and activity of elder sultans and sultan-rulers, Zimanov did not write about Kazakh nobles among them (Zimanov, 2009: 254-256).
Thus, in Soviet historiography, despite Marxist paradigms, historians made attempts to study the heterogeneous policy of the Empire with the borderlands, including the incorporation of the local elite, the multinational Russian nobility, social changes in the Steppe of the post-reform period. These studies and statements of their authors represent an essential layer in the study of the Kazakh nobility. However, in all these works, the local Kazakh elite was mentioned as intermediaries and agents of imperial rule, and not as representatives of the nobility.
The trends of writing Kazakh history had changed since the period of independence when historians paid much attention to the Kazakh statehood, social relations, and traditional social groups of the traditional Kazakh society. In this regard, the focus was on the first Kazakh state, the Kazakh khanate. Moreover, the imperial history of Kazakhs remained in the shadows. Only a small number of works exist on the administrative-territorial structure, and the colonial policy gave an idea of the history of the Kazakhs in the context of imperial rule.
We should consider a significant work in this study field, the work of Banu Abdrakhmanova “History of Kazakhstan” (Abdrakhmanova, 2010). She examined the differentiated colonial policy in the Kazakh steppe, based on different laws, territorial and administrative divisions (the Kazakhs of the Siberian Department and the Orenburg Department). According to Abdrakhmanova, the policy of integration of the Kazakh steppe into the empire took place in such stages: 1-stage, legislative acts, 2-stage, political, and socio-cultural transformations. The author noted the importance of interaction between intermediaries-Russian officials and the local Kazakh elite – in the implementation of imperial policy in the region. Abdrakhmanova also focused on aspects of relations between the Russian state and Kazakh society for many years, defining them as a unique meeting of different worlds and a dialogue of structurally and typologically different cultures: European society and Turkic, nomadic society (Abdrakhmanova, 2010: 21-22).
Banu Abdrakhmanova correctly argued that the influence of the imperial system on the Kazakh steppe arose other structures of sociality, another type of culture based on traditional nomadic. In General, the historian Abdrakhmanova considered the political culture of the Russian state in the Asian space and contained significant statements about the change of the social structure of the Kazakh society during the 19th century.
Discussing the history of the Kazakh steppe within the imperial rule, it is impossible not to dwell on the work of the American historian, Virginia Martin. The focus of her research is the political and social position of the Middle Zhuz under imperial rule and power. In her «Law and custom in the Steppe»(Martin, 2001), Virginia Martin explores practising of adat within the context of Russian colonial rule. She considers entering imperial laws into the Steppe as the new challenge for the Middle Horde Kazakhs in this period to practice adat within a colonial legal framework while adjusting to significant socio-political and economic changes to the nomadic way of life (Martin, 2001: 1). According to Martin, the «merger» (sblizhenie) of the two systems (customary law and Russian law) is a part of the strategy of «managing multiethnicity» that developed within the larger project of imposing imperial rule in the region. As she remarks, she seeks to understand how nomads manipulated the meaning of Russian laws and Kazakh customs they practised both and how that manipulation served their changing legal, socio-economic, political, and cultural needs. In this inquiry, Kazakhs of the Middle Horde presented as active participants in legal and political changes of the Steppe, and the case of Kazakh nobility also strengths this Martin's argument. In her book, Virginia Martin, on the case of barymta, demonstrates Kazakh nomads' perception of imperial order and response acts for it.
An important direction in the study of the Kazakh history of the imperial period in recent decades is developing biographical works devoted to the personalities of the Kazakh history of the 19th century. In the contemporary historiography of Kazakhstan, there is also an attempt to study the Kazakh nomadic elite as part of the Imperial socio-political space. There are studies on individual personalities of the Kazakh nobility. In the works of Irina Erofeeva (Erofeeva, 2013), Zhanuzak Kasymbaev (Kasymbaev, 2000), based on various sources, they make the reconstruction of biographies of representatives of the Kazakh elite group consider the issues of integration of the Kazakh elite, and the formation of the Kazakh bureaucracy. Despite several works outstanding personalities of this period, in general, the history of Kazakhstan of the 19th century is impersonal. The Kazakh researcher Zhanuzak Kasymbayev, who published a series of books devoted to historical figures of the 19th century, who unknown Kazakh persons, came to the same opinion. A series of «Statesmen of the 18th - 19th centuries», includes research about Aishuak khan, Zhantore khan, and Baimukhamed Aishuakov. The author on massive historical sources tries to reveal the biography of the person in the context of his time uniting the Imperial and Kazakh nomadic environment.
The author examines in detail in one of his works, «General-major, sultan-ruler Baymukhamed Aishuakov» (Kasymbaev, 2000: 68), the life and activities of the sultan, the ancestor of the Kazakh noble family. In this paper, the author also analyzes the process of awarding Kazakh sultans: for what and when Kazakh sultans received Russian ranks and orders. Although the author explores all aspects of Baimukhamed Aishuakov’s life, he does not define the nobility title of the sultan.
Works about Kazakh officials. The most detailed in the historical literature historians study the Kazakh bureaucracy. Pre-revolutionary authors also explored Kazakh officials. Ivan Ivanovich Kraft, being an adviser to the Turgay regional Department for foreign Affairs and fluent in Kazakh, actively studied the history and Ethnography of the Kazakh people. In his work, «The judicial part in the Turkestan region and Steppe regions” considers the transformation of the Kazakh people's court in the imperial, thereby describing the process of emergence of Russian bailiffs from the local indigenous population (Kraft, 1898). The famous Russian statistician Petr Petrovich Rumyantsev, who headed the statistical study in the Semirechensk region, in his work». The Kirghiz people in the past and present», refers to the history of the Kazakhs of 1822-1891 as the period of «transition of the Russian Government from the system of approval of the khans to the system of direct management on a common basis» He stated that it was at this time that the Khan's power and the privilege of the sultans destroyed, and the white and black bone equalized in rights and duties. Besides, here, the author described in detail the mechanism of election or appointment of «new»Kazakh officials (Rumyantsev, 1910: 33-34).
Moreover, the Russian public official Konstantin Konstantinovich Palen, to whom the senatorial audit of the Turkestan region entrusted by the Supreme decree on March 19, 1908, in his reports described in detail the administrative structure of the Semirechensk region. Senator Palen stated that at that time, 36 full-time officials served on the Regional Board of the region, 8 of whom considered to be from the indigenous population (Palen, 1910: 109). Also, the senator gave a detailed analysis of the work of administration of area and arbitrariness, and mistakes of officials of the Semirechensk area are specified.
Russian scientist Gregori Konstantinovich Gins in 1911 published his ethnographic notes from his trip to Turkestan and Semirechye, where on behalf of the Resettlement Department, created in connection with the peasant reform Stolypin, studied the legal relationship in the field of water use. While in Central Asia, Gins also collected ethnographic materials. In one of these works – «In the Kyrgyz villages (Essays from a trip to Semirechye)» the author describing the population, structure, and economy of the Kazakhs and Kirghiz near the Jungar Alatau, drew attention to the life and manners of the local volost governors, whom he met on his way (Gins, 1913: 11-15).
Here it is necessary to pay attention to the fact that all of the above authors were themselves Russian officials-scientists, so the presence in their works of the imperial view is not surprising. Besides, in their works, the analysis of an official question is absent and investigated only from one side - from the Russian government's eyes.
Today more Kazakh historians interested in Kazakh officialdom. Even though the nobility does not act in them as an object of study, the authors continuously appeal to this estate, since it was the leading supplier of personnel to state institutions.
Kazakh researchers consider the issues of determining the motives or circumstances of the participation of representatives of the Kazakh people in the imperial government, the mechanism of their appointment or election, structure and formation, the degree of involvement in administrative affairs, the reaction of the indigenous population, especially their social security and several other issues. Contemporary scientists explore Kazakh officials by using different new approaches to try to explain the problem from different sides: in regions of Kazakhstan on activities, grades, quantities Kazakh officials or other criteria, mediation of officials between the Imperial power and the Kazakh society.
Therefore, Kazakh historian Mambet Koigeldiev basing on the researches about the history of Semirechye as a part of the Russian Empire describes also the controlling device in the area. Based on the data of archival materials and the report of Konstantin Palen, the author outlined the staff of the Regional Board of the region, the processes of creating a «local administration» with a new administrative and managerial system and obtaining influential local people ranks from the Russian authorities (Koigeldiev, 2004: 64-102).
Professor Gulmira Sultangalieva writes the main works of the Kazakh officials of the Orenburg Department (Sultangalieva, 2009). In her research, the professor focuses on the problems such as the formation of a bureaucratic estate in the steppe, the incorporation of the Kazakhs into the bureaucratic system of the Empire, the relationship of the Russian administration and the local rulers, the perception of Kazakh officials of the Russian government. Gulmira Sultangalieva also draws attention to the attributes of the official, which attracted the attention of representatives from the Kazakhs. She also systematizes materials about Tatar translators, interpreters, and mullahs in the Kazakh steppe in the XVIII-XIX centuries (Sultangalieva, 2012). Moreover, Sultangalieva notes the important role of the Tatars in the social changes in the Steppe and argues that the Tatars significantly influenced the perception of imperial orders of the Kazakh society. The collection «Kazakh officials in the service of the Russian Empire» published documents on the entry of Kazakhs into the Russian bureaucracy, social security of Kazakh officials, their correspondence, and historical heritage (Sultangalieva, 2015). It is important to note, that Gulmira Sultangalieva, in a joint article with Tenlik Dalayeva, for the first time, demonstrates the problem of incorporation of the Kazakh elite and officials into the nobility of the empire. In this work, the historians make analysis and present new archival documents on the mechanism of Kazakhs entering into the nobility on the example of Kazakh nobles (Sultangalieva, Dalaeva, 2014).
A contemporary Kazakh historian, Tenlik Dalayeva, writes significant works on the history of Kazakh officials of the Siberian Department. In her works, Dalaeva focuses on the process of the formation of the Kazakh bureaucracy in this territory and the main functions of the Kazakh bureaucracy. In your works, Dalaeva investigates significant issues related to the social incorporation of the Steppe into the imperial system, the award system as the basis for the formation of the officials in the Kazakh society, important aspects of the adaptation of Kazakh officials to imperial management.
Kazakh historian Makazhanova Z. in her work “The Problem of formation and originality of the Kazakh bureaucracy in the system of colonial administration of tsarism (the second half of the 19th century)” determines the impact of administrative and territorial reforms of the 19thcentury in the Kazakh steppe on the formation of the Kazakh bureaucracy (Makazhanova, 2004).
In his dissertation "History of the Institute of elders in Kazakhstan (20-60 years of the 19 century)," historian Rakhimkulov D. describes the institute of elders which were created to weaken the traditional Kazakh governance (Rakhimkulov, 2010). Another Kazakh researcher Alimdzhanov Bakhtiar in his work «Economic policy of the Russian Empire in the Turkestan Governor-General (the second half of the 19 - early 20 centuries.)» considers the economic problems in the Semirechensk and Syrdarya regions gives examples of attempts by the Russian administration in the province to increase the «prestige of the representatives of the military people's rule in the eyes of the indigenous» (Alimdzhanov, 2016: 70-71), so that representatives of the local population are also in the future attracted to the Imperial power.
Nevertheless, the question of attracting representatives of the Kazakh people in the Semirechensk region to the administrative affairs of the Russian government was also indirectly touched upon in the works of foreign historians. Professor of Oxford University Alexander Morrison, drawing parallels between British India and Russian Turkestan, in his research notes the role of biys, who later became the bailiffs of tsarist power in the Steppe, also describes the administrative structure in the Semirechensk and Syrdarya regions (Morrison, 2015). Moreover, another foreign scientist Adib Khalid in his work «Culture and Power in Colonial Turkestan», describing the activities of «Russian-native schools», notes the process of formation of «useful citizens of Russia», which as Kazakhs were to serve Russia (Morrison, 2016).
Conclusion. In all these works mentioned above, the theme of studying the activities of officials in the second half of the 19-early 20th century has not been systematically studied however reflects indirectly or in the context of other problems of Kazakh history.
Recently, the Kazakh nobility has become a particular topic of research of many Kazakh historians as Gulmira Sultangalieva and A. Espenbetova (Espenbetova, 2011). The works of these authors consider the formation and activities of the Kazakh bureaucracy, social changes in the Kazakh steppe and the emergence of the Kazakh nobility, thus developing previously poorly studied historical aspects of the transformation of the Steppe in the Russian Empire, which is currently developing particularly intensively and is promising in the future.
The study of the Kazakh nobility contributes to the identification of a complete image of the nobility of the Empire and corresponds to the priority direction in world-historical science. Based on this, the problem of the formation and existence of the Kazakh nobility as part of the noble estate of the Russian Empire needs a broad monographic study. The study of transformation processes in the Steppe during the 19th century, including the formation the Kazakh nobility, is new, since the entry of Kazakh nomads into the Russian nobility, honoured citizenship, officials, was not the object of research in the world and Kazakh historical literature, which proved by the presentation of the historiographical review of the problem.
The article is implemented with the financial support of Committee of science of the RK, scientific project № АР 05130813 «Transformation of the social organization of the Kazakh steppe: stratification and status dynamics (second half of the 18th - 20th of the 20th centuries)».
List of sources and literature:
Абдрахманова Б.М. (2010) История Казахстана. – Караганда: Гласир, 2010. – 354 с.
Alexander Morrison (2015) Creating a Colonial Shari'a for Russian Turkestan. Count Pahlen, the Hidaya, and Anglo-Muhammadan Law. Imperial Co-operation and Transfer, 1870-1930 Empires and Encounters. – 2015. – P. 127-149.
Alexander Morrison (2016) Russian rule in Turkestan and the example of British India. Slavonic & EastEuropeanReview. 2016. – № 4 (84). – P. 666-707.
Алимджанов Б.А. (2016) Экономическая политика Российской империи в Туркестанском генерал-губернаторстве (вторая половина XIX – начало XX вв.). – Санкт-Петербург. 2016. – 376 с.
Асфендияров С.Д. (1993) История Казахстана. – Алма-Ата. – 304 с.
Бекмаханов Е.Б. (1957) Присоединение Казахстана к России. – Алма-Ата: Академия науки СССР. 1957. – 337 с.
Добросмыслов А.И. (1902) Тургайская область. Исторический очерк. – Тверь: Типография Н.М. Радионова, 1902. 524 с.
Ерофеева И.В. (2013) «Между всеми старщинами знатнейший»: первый казахский тархан Жанибек Кошкарулы. Алматы: ОФ «Фонд Мухтара Ауэзова», 2013.
Еспенбетова А.М. (2011) Формирование новых сословий в казахском обществе в XIX – начале XX вв. Афтореферат диссертации на соискание степени кандидата исторических наук: 07.00.03. – Караганда, 2011. – 31 с.
Гинс Г.К. (1913) В киргизских аулах. // Историческйи вестник. 1913. – №10. – 49 с.
Касымбаев Ж. (2000) Генерал, султан-правитель Баймухамед Айшуаков (1790-1847). Книгапервая. – Алматы: Олке, 2000. – 188 с.
Kelly O'Neil (2010) Rethinking elite integration: The Crimean Murzas and the evolution of Russian nobility. Cahiers du monde russe. 2010. №2 (51). – P. 397-417. [In Russian].
Қойгелдиев М. (2004) Жетісудағы Ресей билігі (XIX ғ. – 1917 ж.). – Астана: Елорда, 2004. – 216 б.
Крафт И.И. (1900) Из киргизской старины. – Оренбург: Типо-литография Ф. Сачкова. 1900. – 168 с.
Крафт И.И. (1898) Судебная часть в Туркестанском крае и степных областях. Собранный старшим советником Тургайской области Крафтом И.И. Оренбург. – 234 с.
Макажанова З.Ш. (2004) Политика российских властей по подготовке кадров для управленческого аппарата (60-90-е годы XIX в.). // Вестник КазНПУ имени Абая, 2004. №2. – С. 46-50.
Мейер Л. (1865) Киргизская степь Оренбургского ведомства. – Санкт-Петербург, 1865. – 289 с.
Отчет по ревизии Туркестанского края, произведенной по Высочайшему повелению сенатором Гофмейстером графом К.К. Паленом (1910). Областное управление. – Санкт-Петербург, 1910. – 353 с.
Рахимкулов Д.А. (2010) История института старшин в Казахстане (20-60 гг. ХХ в.). Автореферат диссертации на соискание кандидата исторических наук: 07.00.03. – Алматы, 2010. – 163 с.
Румянцев П.П. (1910) Киргизский народ в прошлом инастоящем. – Санкт-Петербург, 1910. – 65 с.
Султангалиева Г.С. (2009) Казахское чиновничество Оренбургского ведомства: формирование и направление деятельности. Acta Slavica Iaponica, 2009. Vol. 27. – 77-101 рр.
Sultangalieva G.S. (2012) The Russian Empire and the intermediary role of Tatars in Kazakhstan: The politics of cooperation and rejection. Asiatic Russia: Imperial power in regional and international contexts. – Tokio. – 328 p.
Султангалиева Г.С. (2000) Татарские и башкирские служащие в Казахской степи (XVIII-ХIХ вв.). / Etnopanorama. – №3. – С. 48-54.
Султангалиева Г.С., Далаева Т.Т. (2014) Диплом на дворянское достоиснтво султану. / Исторический архив. – 2014. – №4. – С.174-186.
Virginia Martin (2001) Law and custom in the Steppe. Richmond: Roultadge. – 2001. – 246 p.
Зиманов С. (2009) Политический строй Казахстана первой половины XIX века и Букеевское ханство. – Алматы: Арыс. – 419 с.
Abdrakhmanova B.M. (2010) Istoriya Kazakhstana [History of Kazakhstan]. – Karaganda: Glasir, 2010. – 354 p. [In Russian].
Alexander Morrison (2015) Creating a Colonial Shari'a for Russian Turkestan. Count Pahlen, the Hidaya, and Anglo-Muhammadan Law. Imperial Co-operation and Transfer, 1870-1930 Empires and Encounters. – 2015. – P. 127-149.
Alexander Morrison (2016) Russian rule in Turkestan and the example of British India. Slavonic & East European Review, 2016. – № 4 (84). – P. 666-707.
Alimdzhanov B.A. (2016) Ekonomicheskaya politika rossiiskoi imperii v Turkestanskom general-gubernatorstve (vtoraya polovina XIX - nachalo XX vv.) [The economic policy of the Russian empire in the Turkestan governor-general (second half of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries)]. – Sankt-Peterburg, 2016. – 376 p. [In Russian].
Asfendiyarov S.D. (1993) Istoria Kazakhstana [History of Kazakhstan]. – Alma-Ata. 1993. – 304 p. [In Russian].
Bekmakhanov E.B. (1957) Prisoyedineniye Kazakhstana k Rossii [The incorporation of Kazakhstan to Russia]. – Alma-Ata: Academy of Sciences of the USSR. 1957. – 337 p. [In Russian].
Dobrosmyslov A.I. (1902) Turgaiskaia oblast'. Istoricheskii ocherk. – Tver: Tipolithography N.M. Radionova, 1902. – 524 p. [In Russian].
Erofeeva I.V. (2013) «Mezhdu vsemi starshinami znatneyshiy» pervyy kazakhskiy tarkhan Zhanibek Koshkaruly [«Between all foremen the most notable» First Kazakh Tarkhan Zhanibek Koshkarula]. – Almaty: OF «Found of Mukhtar Auezov», 2013. – 308 p. [In Russian].
Espenbetova A.M. (2011) Formirovaniye novyh soslovii v kazakhskom kochevom obshchestve v XIX – nachale XX vv. [The Formation of a New Estates in the Kazakh Nomadic Society in the 19th - Early 20th Centuries]: Abstract of the diss .... candidate of historical sciences: 07.00.03. – Karaganda, 2011. – 31 p. [In Russian].
Gins G.K. (1913) V kirgizskikh aulakh (In the Kyrgyz villages). Historical Bulletin, 1913. – №10. – 49 p. [In Russian].
Kasymbayev Zh. (2000) General, sultan-pravitel' Baymukhamed Ayshuakov (1790-1847). Kniga pervaya [General, Sultan-ruler Baimuhamed Aishuakov (1790-1847). The first book]. – Almaty: Olke. 2000. – 188 p. [In Russian].
Kelly O'Neil (2010) Rethinking elite integration: The Crimean Murzas and the evolution of Russian nobility. Cahiers du monde russe, 2010. – №2 (51), – P. 397-417. [In Russian].
Koigeldiev M. (2004) Jetisudagy Resei biligi (XIX g. – 1917 zh.) [Russian authorities in Semirechye (XIX - 1917)]. – Astana: Elorda,2004.– 216 p. [In Kazakh].
Kraft I.I. (1900) Iz kirgizskoi stariny [From Kyrgyz antiquity]. – Orenburg: Tipo-litographia. F. Sachkova. 1900. – 168 p. [In Russian].
Kraft I.I. (1898) Sudebnaya chast' v Turkestanskom kraie i stepnykh oblastyakh [Judicial part in Turkestan and Steppe regions]. Compiled by a senior adviser to Turgay region Kraft I.I. – Orenburg, 1898. – 234 p.
Makazhanova Z.Sh. (2004) Politika rossiyskikh vlastei po podgotovke kadrov dlia upravlencheskogo apparata (60-90-e gody XIX v.) [The policy of the Russian authorities in training personnel for the administrative apparatus (60-90s of the XIX century)]. Bulletin of KazNPU named after Abay, Series Historical and socio-political sciences, 2004. – №2, – P. 46-50. [In Russian].
Meier L. (1865) Kirgizskaia step' Orenburgskogo vedomstva [Kyrgyz steppe of the Orenburg department]. – Sankt-Peterburg, 1865. – 289 s. [In Russian].
Otchet po revizii Turkestanskogo kraya, proizvedennoi po Vysochaishemu poveleniiu Senatorom Gofmeisterom Grafom K.K. Palenom(1910). Oblastnoe upravlenie. [Report on the audit of the Turkestan Territory, carried out at the Highest Command by Senator Hoffmeister Earl K.K. Palen. Regional management]. – Sankt-Peterburg, 1910. – 353 p. [In Russian].
Rakhimkulov D.A. (2010) Istoria instituta starshin v Kazakhstane (20-60 gg. XX v.) [History of the institute of elders in Kazakhstan (20-60 years of the twentieth century)]: Abstract dis. ... candidate of historical sciences: 07.00.03. – Almaty, 2010. – 168 p. [In Russian].
Rumyantsev P.P. (1910) Kirgizskiy narod v proshlom i nastoyashchem [Kyrgyz people in the past and present]. – Sankt-Peterburg, 1910. – 65 p. [In Russian].
Sultangalieva G.S. (2009) Kazakhskoe chinovnichestva Orenburgskogo vedomstva: formirovanie i napravlenie deiatel'nosti [Kazakh officials of the Orenburg department: formation and direction of activity (ХIX)]. – Acta Slavica Iaponica, 2009. – Vol. 27. – 77‒101 рр. [In Russian].
Sultangalieva G.S. (2012) The Russian Empire and the intermediary role of Tatars in Kazakhstan: The politics of cooperation and rejection. Asiatic Russia: Imperial power in regional and international contexts. – Tokio, 2012. – 328 p.
Sultangalieva G.S. (2000) Tatarskie i bashkirskie sluzhashchie v kazakhskoi stepi (XVIII-ХIХ vv.) [Tatar and Bashkir servants in the Kazakh steppe (XVIII-XIX cent.)] Etnopanorama, 2000. – №3. – P. 48-54. [In Russian].
Sultangalieva G.S., Dalaeva T.T. (2014) Diplom na dvoryanskoye dostoinstvo sultanu [Diploma on the noble dignity to the Sultan]. Historical archive, 2014. – №4. – 174-186 рр. [In Russian].
Virginia Martin (2001) Law and custom in the Steppe. – Richmond: Roultadge. 2001. – 246 p.
Zimanov S. (2009) Politicheskii stroi Kazakhstana pervoi poloviny XIX veka i Bukeyevskoe khanstvo [The political system of Kazakhstan in the first half of the 19th century and the Bukeev khanate]. – Almaty: Arys, 2009. – 419 p. [In Russian].
ҚАЗАҚ ДВОРЯНДЫҒЫНЫҢ ЗЕРТТЕЛУІ: ХІХ ҒАСЫРДАҒЫ ҚАЗАҚ ДАЛАСЫНДАҒЫ ӘЛЕУМЕТТІК ӨЗГЕРІСТЕР ТУРАЛЫ
Тулешова¹ У.Ж.1, Е.А. Галимов²
¹Ph.D., әл-Фараби атындағы Қазақ ұлттық университетінің аға оқытушысы. Қазақстан. Алматы.
²«Ғылым ордасы» РМК Археология мұражайының меңгерушісі,. Қазақстан. Алматы.
Аңдатпа.Бүгінгі таңда Ресей империясы шет аймақтарының әлеуметтік интеграциясы тарих ғылымы саласындағы ең өзекті әрі даулы мәселе. Соңғы жылдары «империялық бұрылыс» аясында орталық пен периферияның тұтастығы, олардың өзара қатынастарының ерекшеліктері басым бағыттардың қатарында болып келеді. Бүгінде гуманитарлық ғылымдар көптеген шет аймақтарды біріктіріп, әлеуметтік және мәдени топтардың, сословиелердің алуандығына ие болған Ресей империясының табиғи тарихи дамуын қалпына келтіру мәселесін шешуге тырысуда. Ресей империясын көпұлттық, поликонфессионалды мемлекет ретінде қарастыратын қазіргі әлемдік концепциялар аймақтардың интеграция үрдісіндегі ерекшеліктерін, тәсілдері мен модельдерін анықтауға, әрбір аймақтың империядағы рөлін анықтауға және орталық пен шет аймақтардың қатынасының алуан түрлі формасын біртұтас схемаға келтіруге мүмкіндік береді. ХІХ ғасырда Қазақ даласы да империяның саяси әрі әлеуметтік құрамдас бөлігіне айналып, дәстүрлі басқару жүйесін өзгертті. Қазақ жерінде болған әлеуметтік өзгерістерді қазақ дворяндығының қалыптасуы мысалында зерттеу көшпелі қазақтардың Ресей империясының артықшылыққа ие сословиелеріне инкорпорациясының ерекшеліктерін анықтауға мүмкіндік береді. Бұл империялық алуандылықты түсінуде де, кошпелі халықтардың (башқұрт, қалмақ және т.б.) империяның сословиелік құрылымына енуіндегі ерекшеліктерді анықтауда да маңызды болғанымен, империя құрамындағы қазақ қоғамының әлеуметтік трансформациясын қазақ дворяндығының қалыптасу үрдісі мен табиғаты арқылы зерттеуге әлемдік те, отандық та ғылымда тарихи еңбектер жоқтың қасы. Ұсынылып отырған мақалада ХІХ ғасырдағы Қазақ даласындағы әлеуметтік өзгерістерді зерттеу деңгейі, қазақ дворяндығы туралы әлемдік және отандық тарихнамаға талдау жасау арқылы айқындалады.
Түйін сөздер: Ресей империясы, қазақ дворяндары, әлеуметтік тарих, тарихнама, сұлтандар, XIX ғасырдағы қазақ тарихы.
ИССЛЕДОВАНИЕ КАЗАХСКОГО ДВОРЯНСТВА:
О СОЦИАЛЬНОМ ПРЕОБРАЗОВАНИИ СТЕПИ В 19 ВЕКЕ
У.Ж. Тулешова¹, Е.А.Галимов²
¹Ph.D., старший преподаватель Казахского национального университета им. аль-Фараби. Казахстан. г. Алматы.
²Заведующий Музеем археологии РГП «Ғылым ордасы». Казахстан. г. Алматы.
Аннотация.Проблема социальной интеграции окраинных территорий в порядок Российской империи является актуальной и наиболее обсуждаемой сегодня в научной сфере. Последние десятилетия в рамках «имперского поворота» тема единости центра и периферии, особенности их взаимоотношения становятся приоритетным направлениям. Сегодня гуманитарные науки пытаются решить задачу воссоздания естественного исторического развития Российской империи, которая «прирастала» многочисленными окраинами и представляла широкий срез социо-культурных слоев и сословий. Современные концепции изучения Российской империи как мультинациональной, поликонфессиональной, позволяют раскрыть особенности, способы и модели интеграции регионов, определить роль каждого региона в имперской реалии и выявить все формы взаимоотношений центра и периферии в целостной картине. Казахская степь в 19 веке стала социо-политическим составляющим империи, трансформируя традиционную систему управления. Хотя исследование социальных изменений в Степи важно, как в понимании имперской разнообразности, так и выявлении отличий вхождения других кочевых народов (башкир, калмык и др.) в сословный порядок империи, в мировой и в отечественной науке не предпринимались попытки изучения процесса формирования казахского дворянства в контексте социальной инкорпорации Казахской степи в Российскую империю. Представленная статья раскрывает степень исследования социальных перемен в Казахской степи 19-го века, акцентируя внимания на работах о казахском дворянстве мировой и казахской историографии.Ключевые слова: Российская империя, казахское дворянство, социальная история, историография, султаны, казахская история в XIXвеке.