On June 28-30, Ulan-Ude hosted the international scientific conference "Historical Experience of Interaction between Peoples and Civilizations: on the 350th anniversary of Buryatia's entry into the Russian State". The conference was organized by the Government of the Republic of Buryatia, the Institute of Mongolian Studies, Buddhology and Tibetology of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences with the support of the Russian Humanitarian Science Foundation.

The conference featured 224 oral and poster presentations from Moscow, St. Petersburg, Vladivostok, Yekaterinburg, Kemerovo, Novosibirsk, Omsk, Irkutsk, Chita, Elista, Abakan, Makhachkala, Yakutsk, Ufa, Ulan-Ude, Ulaanbaatar (Mongolia), Hohhot (China), Beijing, Lanzhou (China), Tokyo (Japan), Seoul (Korea), Calcutta, Delhi, Sarnath, Varanasi (India). A wide range of issues related to the history of interaction of the Buryat ethnic group and the peoples of Russia and Central Asia with the ethno-cultural and confessional diversity of the regions, with the peculiarities of their linguistic, ecological and political landscapes were discussed.

President of the Republic of Buryatia V. V. Nagovitsyn addressed the conference participants with greetings. He noted the importance of this event for Russia as a whole and especially for the peoples of Buryatia and Transbaikalia, who have chosen the path of development in line with the Russian multi-ethnic and multi-confessional civilization.

The plenary session was opened by the report "Voluntary entry of Buryatia into Russia: historical experience of interaction" by the Director of the Institute of Corresponding Members. RAS B. V. Bazarov.

The annexation of Buryatia to Russia, he noted, was of historical significance for the Buryat people. With the establishment of state borders, the Buryats ' earlier migrations to Mongolia became more orderly and virtually ceased. As a result, within the framework of the Russian state, the Buryat tribes completed their consolidation into the Buryat people with their own language and culture. The Russian state not only preserved but also improved the local ethnic self-government of the Buryats. The Buryats, being part of Russia, joined a new level and method of economic development, agricultural and industrial work, and successfully developed animal husbandry and crafts. In this regard, they gradually moved from a nomadic way of life to a semi-sedentary and sedentary one, and their living conditions were constantly improved. The Buryats became part of the Russian state with the values of the Buddhist religion and culture, mastered writing, education, science, medicine, literature and art. Russian culture also played an important role in shaping the content and new types of civilizational development of the peoples of Buryatia.

In the report of the Director of the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences Yu. A. Petrov "Joining peoples and territories to Russia: a view from the XXI century", some modern theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of the process of ethnic and socio-cultural integration of peoples who inhabited the territory of the Russian Empire were considered. It was noted, in particular, that this process went through several stages: the actual annexation (sometimes in the form of conquest), i.e. the establishment of Russian citizenship; gradual incorporation into the structure of the state; and finally, assimilation, which became more and more active over time and was sometimes interpreted as the final goal and result of incorporation. These processes corresponded to some trends in the development of the state. First, the slow but steady unification of the legal status of territories, the establishment of a single standard of citizenship and governance; second, Russification, which was caused primarily by an objective circumstance-numerical and cultural

page 139
(dominant religion, language of communication) by the dominance of Russians in Russia. Both trends alternately weakened and intensified, but they were constantly present in different forms in the Russian history of the XVI-XIX centuries. Consciously, they were elevated to the rank of state policy only at the end of the XIX century.

Yu.A. Elert, Deputy Director of the Institute of History of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, analyzed the information about the peoples of Transbaikalia contained in the works and materials of the Second Kamchatka Expedition.

The fate of the Mongolian world, traced in the decrees of the Qing emperors (1640-1728), was the topic of the report of the Director of the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of Mongolia S. Chuluun.

Head of the Department of Ethnography of Siberia at the Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography. L. R. Pavlinskaya focused on the role and significance of young ethnic groups in shaping the border policy of the Russian state in the Baikal region in the late 17th and early 18th centuries. The speaker drew attention to the fact that the indigenous population of the Baikal region, together with the Russians, was involved in the struggle against the Mongols. Without this serious help, the Russians were unlikely to be able to defend Transbaikalia, since they were significantly outnumbered by the Mongols. This was due to the process of consolidation of the Mongolian-speaking population of the Baikal region, which began to gain momentum, and the formation of a young Buryat ethnic group. The ascending ethno-educational process was accompanied by active self-affirmation, the formation of ethnic identity, opposed to others. This opposition of themselves as a single people to the genetically related population of the Central Asian steppes, based on a new ethnic identity, was the basis for the military unification of the Buryats with the Russians.

Rector of the Irkutsk Institute for Advanced Training of Educational Workers L. M. Dameshik in his report "Historical and typological models of incorporation of non-Russian peoples into the state system of the Empire" noted that the differentiated approach of the Russian government to the outskirts was based on the peculiarities of the geopolitical situation of a particular region, natural and climatic conditions, ethnic and religious factors, the class composition of the population, etc. The beginning of the mass migration of the Russian peasantry to Asian Russia led to a shift in the ethnic border, contributed to the development of common economic activities, everyday life, culture and religion for Russians and aborigines. The desire for economic integration, common economic and socio-cultural activities began to be considered by the government as the most important incentive for the political consolidation of the empire and the elimination of national separatism.

Within the framework of the conference, six sections were organized: "History and modernity", "Archaeological cultures and ethnography of the peoples of Russia and Central Asia", "Modern social processes in cross-border regions of Inner Asia", "Philosophical and religious systems of Central Asia in historical perspective", "Folklore and literature in the spiritual heritage of the peoples of Russia and Central Asia Languages and Writing of the peoples of Central Asia", as well as two round tables: "Buddhism and Science: dialogue and interaction in the modern world", "Problems of morphology and word formation of Mongolian languages".

Section "History and modernity".

V. N. Tuguzhekova (Abakan) in her report "On the history of the development of Southern Siberia (based on materials from Khakassia)" stated that the process of Khakassia (Kyrgyz land) becoming part of Russia took place in difficult political conditions - in the confrontation of Russia with the Yenisei Kyrgyz and the Mongolian-speaking Hotogoits and Oirats-and lasted for more than 100 years. G. Ochirova (Elista) dedicated her speech to the history of Buryat-Kalmyk relations. T. D. Skrynnikova (St. Petersburg) examined the socio-political structure of Buryat society during the period of the Russian Empire.

The report of Tanaka K. (Japan) described the impressions of the first plenipotentiary Ambassador of Japan to Russia Enomoto Takeaki from his stay in Buryatia in 1878, recorded in his diary. This diary was first published in Japan in 1935. During his two-month trip from Moscow to Vladivostok, the ambassador visited a number of cities and towns in Buryatia. In the Tamchinsky datsan, he met with the Hambo Lama Dampil Gamboev.

N. P. Matkhanova (Novosibirsk) in her report, based on the study of more than 100 identified sources of memoirs, concluded that they should be used in the study of various aspects of the history of the Buryats. It was noted that the Buryats were written about by governors-general and political exiles, priests and doctors, teachers and military personnel, indigenous Siberians and people who visited Eastern Siberia only on their way or for a short time.

With. Chatterjee (India) in his report "Scenarios of Buryatia opening up" noted that in the broad outline of Eurasian history, the main scenarios of colonial and nationalist conflicts are:

page 140
mixing, they demonstrate central-peripheral relationships. If we consider the Russian southern outskirts, then the dominant scenario will be Russian colonization. The speaker noted that when tracing cardinal historical trends, one should not lose sight of the fate of small ethnic groups - Tungus, Oirats, Dzungars. The modern development of Buryatia, he concluded, fits well into the concept of multi-scenario design. Buryatia is integrated into the Russian environment and represents the Asian dominant in the current history.

Ray J. Kumar (India) examined the historical relations between the Buryats and the peoples of Russia and Central Asia. N. Khishigt (Mongolia) in his report "Buryats in Mongolia (the first quarter of the XX century)" presented unknown archival sources concerning Buryat immigrants and highlighted the policy of the Mongolian state in relation to Buryat immigrants. In the report of K. Varick (India) examined the history of Buryat-Russian relations in terms of mutual enrichment of various cultures and civilizations on the Asian continent.

K. V. Orlova (Russia) in her report "Kalmyks in the system of state administration of the Russian Empire (the last third of the XVIII - mid-XIX centuries)" noted that thanks to the "Regulations on the administration of the Kalmyk people" of 1806, 1834, 1847. The State policy aimed at the legal consolidation of the Kalmyks ' right to land use was consistently implemented. Ajay Kumar Patnaik's report (India) considered labor migration as a factor contributing to greater integration of Russia and Central Asia. The report of N. Galimaa and D. Enkhbayar (both from Mongolia) was devoted to a retrospective of Mongolian-Russian relations in the XX century. Jung Bong-soo (Korea) examines Buryat illegal labor immigrants in South Korea in the context of interethnic relations. V. I. Dyatlov's report (Irkutsk) was devoted to cross-border migrants in Baikal Siberia. The speaker believes that the number of migrants and their role in the economic and social life of the region allow us to speak about the formation of a new element of the ethno-cultural and social structure here.

C. Enkhchimeg (Mongolia) spoke about the fate of Agin Buryats who immigrated to Mongolia in 1917 B. Natsagdorj (Mongolia) analyzed Russian-Mongolian relations in the Baikal region in the 17th century V. P. Shakherov (Irkutsk) investigated the role of Kyakhta trade in the economic development of Baikal Siberia in the late 18th - first half of the 19th century. Russian-Chinese trade, despite its transit nature, contributed to the development of the region's transport system, and focused a number of local crafts and industries on meeting their needs.

"Administrative structure and internal management of the peoples of the Baikal region (XVII-XIX centuries)" is the topic of the report by D. D. Nimaev (Ulan-Ude). The creation of a system of steppe dumas, he believes, had a generally favorable impact on the life of relatively large ethnic groups in Siberia. The report of Ts. B. Batuev (Ulan-Ude) was devoted to the social and national policy of regional authorities in the Republic of Buryatia in the second half of the 1990s. L. V. Kalmina (Ulan-Ude) traced the fate of non-indigenous ethnic groups in the Trans-Baikal multiethnic space of the second half of the XIX-early XX centuries. The report of M. N. Baldano (Ulan-Ude) examines archival documents that reflect the historical trip of the Khori Buryats to Tsar Peter I. The report of L. V. Kuras (Ulan-Ude) traced the history of the liberation of Western Transbaikalia from foreign interventionists and White Guards. VD. Dugarov (Ulan-Ude) considered the experience of integration processes in the Republic of Buryatia and the regions of the Siberian Federal District with the border territories of Mongolia.

The role of migration in the formation of the population of Buryatia was analyzed in the report of Z. A. Danilova (Ulan-Ude). The most active social mobility of the population of Buryatia was observed in the 1960s and 1980s. The 1990s were characterized by migration losses in population exchange with almost all the Union republics and regions of the Russian Federation. In recent years, there has been a slight increase in the population due to natural growth, which is a positive moment in the demographic processes in the studied territory.

Section "Archaeological cultures and ethnography of the peoples of Russia and Central Asia".

B. R. Zoriktuev (Ulan-Ude) in his report investigated the topic of the formation of the Buryat nation. In the 80s of the XVIII century, he noted, the majority of the population of Transbaikalia called themselves Buryats. At the same time, on the western and partly eastern (coastal) sides of Lake Baikal, where immigrants from the Pre-Baikal region settled compactly, the name buret, which has been preserved to this day in the speech of the older generation, actively functioned. According to the speaker, by this time the unification processes in the region as a whole were completed, the Buryat people were formed, which had the following characteristics:

page 141
These are the characteristics that are characteristic of this type of ethnic community. Among them, it is necessary to highlight the unified ethnic identity that has developed among the population on both sides of Lake Baikal, the core element of which is the official name of the Buryat people. Thanks to him, the inhabitants of the region realized their belonging to the united Buryat people and at the same time distinguished themselves from other similar communities. Since the formation of a single ethnic identity, which consolidated all parts of the new ethnos, dates back to the 80s of the XVIII century, this milestone can be considered the time of completion of the formation of the Buryat nation.

I. V. Rassadin's report (Ulan-Ude) considered the formation of the Soyot ethnic group on the eve of its annexation to Russia. According to their origin and generic composition, the Okinawan Soyotes are a complex ethnic formation, which includes three independent genera: Haasut, Irkit and Onkhot. In their new homeland, the Soyots quickly became close to the Buryats, which was greatly facilitated by generic exogamy, because of which the Soyots were forced to take wives from neighboring Buryats. B. D. Tsybenov (Ulan-Ude) studied the ancestral composition and distribution of Daurians and Barguts in the XVII-XVIII centuries. The topic of the report of Koshud Cengel (China) was the formation of the Dorbenoirat Union. The military alliance of the Oirat tribes, the speaker noted, was formed after 1580 and reached the peak of its power by 1606. The date of formation of the Dorben-Oirat union can be considered 1616. One of the main reasons was the threat from the Khalkha princes. Tsetsenmunkh (China) spoke about the everyday life of modern Kereites.Choyropov (Ulan-Ude) highlighted the history of the development of everyday life and lifestyle of indigenous small-numbered peoples of the North of Siberia and Buryatia. The article analyzes the socio-economic and socio-cultural situation of ethnic groups, the problems of implementing the collective rights of indigenous small-numbered peoples, regulating land relations, preserving ethnic culture, and traditional nature management. G. Munkh-Erdene (Mongolia) considered the socio-cultural aspects of the life of such a group of the population of Mongolia as gold miners (Ninya).

In the report "Changing environmental management paradigms in Mongolia as the main cause of environmental degradation" Yu. I. Drobyshev, P. D. Gunin, S. N. Bazha, S.-Kh. D. Syrtypova (Moscow) drew attention to the fact that in just one century Mongolia has changed three models of natural resource use, which can be called traditional, socialist and market economy. Each of them had its own characteristics, important from the point of view of preserving the environment and determined by the prevailing ideology in society. In general, there is a tendency to reduce the ecophilic potential rooted in the Mongolian nomadic culture, which leads to an increasingly deep and versatile exploitation of natural resources in Mongolia and, as a result, to their depletion and increasing degradation.

The report of M. M. Sodnompilova (Ulan-Ude) investigated the role of the Nagasanar group in the traditional kinship system of Buryats. The term nagasanar refers to the closest blood relatives in relation to the family on the maternal side. Nagasa's mother's brother is a key figure in the system of social relations in the traditions of all the peoples of the Mongolian world. In Buryat society, until the 1930s, cross-union marriage - the marriage of a young man to a cousin - the daughter of his mother's brother, i.e. nagas, retained its position. This archaic form of marriage was considered ideal, and many Buryat families sought to conclude at least one marriage that meets the old traditions. Cross-cousin marriage contains the idea of the absence of kinship as such, in fact, there is a doubling of the relationship of succession: for the bride, her own aunt became her mother-in-law, for the groom, her own uncle became the father-in-law.

Their positions as the main relative of Nagas, and in general, relatives on the maternal line - Nagasanar, retain in modern Buryat families. Moreover, relationships with maternal relatives in most Buryat families are considered as primary, and it is believed that it is the maternal relationship that has traditionally been closer.

In the report of Ts. Batseren, V. Khash-Erdene (Mongolia) changes in the social behavior of Mongolian women married to foreigners (Koreans) were considered.

In the report of O. A. Donskikh (Novosibirsk) "On the two principles of human culture", it was concluded that the phenomenon of human culture can be understood as the interdependence of three important concepts - the game theory of culture by I. Huizinga, the labor theory of human origin, and the theory of the leisure class by T. Veblen. Culture arises and develops not as a game or as a labor activity for the production of the necessary product for the maintenance of life, but as an intersection of these activities that originated in the animal world. Differing functionally,

page 142
these types of activities in a more developed society are beginning to differ socially as well. Play becomes the primary function of the leisure class (the elite), while routine remains the function of the rest of society. At the same time, it is the game that sets and justifies the conservative dimension of society, its form and thus its culture by the rigidity of its rules.

S. A. Vasyutin (Kemerovo) drew attention to the peculiarities of the social development of the nomadic peoples of Central Asia in the early Middle Ages. Observation of the dynamics of social development of nomads shows, the speaker believes, that due to a number of features of their socio-economic structure, the processes of political integration in the nomadic environment of Central Asia outstripped the processes of complication of the social system.

Ethnocultural interactions in the territory of modern Buryatia in previous epochs were analyzed in the report of A. M. Buraev (Ulan-Ude). During the Eneolithic period, the Afanasiev (Caucasian) population migrated to the south-east, to the steppes of Mongolia and, possibly, Transbaikalia, which gave an impetus to mestizoization processes in this territory. In the subsequent period, a mixed population lives here, in the anthropological composition of which, along with Caucasians and Mongoloids, there are mixed groups. At the same time, the Kereksur culture and monuments of the Mongun-Taiga type are dominated by the Caucasoid component, while the population of the tile grave culture is expressed in the Mongoloid form. At the turn of the 2nd and 1st millennium BC, for the first time among the nomads of the studied territory, long-term ethno-cultural contacts between representatives of not only different ethnic groups, but also different races are recorded. It seems that Europoid-Mongoloid contacts were typical for the population of the region throughout the history of nomadic formations. The following hypothetical scheme of Europoid-Mongoloid interethnic and intertribal interaction on the territory of Eastern Siberia and Mongolia in the era of ancient nomads is presented. During this period, there was no rigid ethnic or even racial differentiation between the nomadic groups inhabiting the Central Asian steppes. On the basis of the common domestic and spiritual way of life, individual tribes, clans, families and individuals easily integrated into larger socio-political formations, taking the side of a stronger and more successful one.

S. V. Danilov's report on the basis of archaeological data discussed the stages of formation of nomadic cattle breeding in Central Asia. In the report of M. S. Antonova (SPb. The ethnocultural situation of the Baikal region, which has a long history of intercultural relations and dialogue between Eastern and Western civilizations located at the intersection of the most important geopolitical world axes (the Christian world - the Buddhist world; Russia - the Asia-Pacific region, etc.), was considered. implementation of the following directions: formation and cultivation of ideas of spiritual cooperation of the population; creation of an environment of interethnic harmony; consolidation of a multinational people united by a common goal of prosperity of their native land, protection of Lake Baikal, creation of an economically powerful potential of the region; creation of an atmosphere of mutual respect for national traditions and customs, further development of spiritual and cultural exchange Russia and the Baikal region within the framework of the Euro-Asian space; improving the national general education school, fostering respect for the culture and history of the peoples of Russia and world cultural values.

Section "Modern social processes in cross-border regions of Inner Asia".

"The Buryat people in the system of inter - civilizational integration" is the topic of the report by Yu. B. Randalov (Ulan-Ude). The main result of the Soviet era for the Buryat people, the speaker believes, was the successful development of Russian and European culture and the preservation and development of their eastern culture. This created prerequisites for the formation of a system of inter-civilizational integration of the Buryat and Russian peoples. E. D. Dagbaev (Ulan-Ude) analyzed the political factors of the Buryat people's development. Among the most significant factors that predetermined the political development of the Buryat people in the XX century were the democratization of the political system and the federalist state structure. E. V. Petrova (Ulan-Ude) addressed the problem of social well-being of the population of the Siberian republics. The report notes that the republics of Siberia are characterized by the process of actualization of ethnic identity, which is more clearly expressed among representatives of titular groups. The prospects for stabilizing the social well-being of the population in the republics are associated with improving the socio-economic development of the regions, cultivating an integrated health system.-

page 143
radio strategies of behavior, modeling the unity of republican and civil identities.

The socio-structural processes of the region in the changing society of the beginning of the XXI century are traced in the report of D. D. Badaraev (Ulan-Ude). The social structure of Buryatia in modern conditions, the speaker notes, can be characterized by a five-level structural formation (national and regional elite - 0.4%, owners of various forms of ownership 1.2, middle strata-52.3, poor strata 35 and extremely poor strata of the population-11.1%), although its formation is far from complete.

N. A. Zateeva (Ulan-Ude) studied socio-cultural aspects of rural development in the republics of Buryatia, Tyva and Khakassia. The most important evidence of the preservation of national culture, the speaker believes, is the knowledge of the native language, in this issue the leader is the Republic of Tuva, the weakest of the ethnic groups under consideration, the native language is spoken by the Khakas. Statistical data reflect the trend of decreasing native language proficiency in proportion to the decline in the rural population.

Stratification of the population of the Republic of Buryatia by the level of well-being in the context of the transformation of Russian society was the topic of the report by P. B. Abzaev and S. V. Rinchino (both in Ulan-Ude). The authors ' assessments of the level of well-being of the region's population show that in general, less than 1.0% belong to the upper stratum; no more than 10% belong to the middle stratum; almost 69% belong to the intermediate stratum; and 20% belong to the poor. The speakers believe that the process of differentiating the population of the region by the level of well-being, as well as the Russian society as a whole, according to these criteria, has not yet acquired a clearly defined and complete character and will, in their opinion, be associated with the transition of Russia to the post-industrial stage of development.

S. D.-N. Dagbaeva (Ulan-Ude) considered the factors and conditions that determine the quality of life in the Republic of Buryatia: a comfortable ethno-social climate, low conflict can serve to reduce migration against the background of increasing terrorist threats in large cities of Russia and in other regions. In the future, the speaker believes, we should expect a process of so-called reverse migration.

Social problems of the rural population of Buryatia in the context of institutional transformation of the agro-industrial complex were the focus of V. G. Zhalsanova's report (Ulan-Ude). According to the speaker, the modern rural resident of Buryatia is characterized by the preservation of a state-centered perception of reality, a low level of adaptive potential. By the end of the 2010s, the division of rural family farms into commodity-based, consumer-based, and partially consumer-based farms was much clearer.

Interethnic tolerance in multiethnic regions was the topic of the report of E. V. Bimbayeva (Ulan-Ude). Since the basis of ethnic tolerance is a social community formed on a regional (territorial) basis, and not on an ethnic basis, it would be desirable, the speaker believes, to abandon the dichotomy of "titular non-titular" and "indigenous non-indigenous" in multicultural regions. The involuntary hierarchy set by this dichotomy can lead to an acute struggle for status and influence in the republic, rivalry between national clans, and the fact that the struggle for political and economic dominance can develop into interethnic conflicts and clashes.

Religiosity as a factor of social well-being of the urban population in the conditions of transformation of society was considered in the report of A. Y. Egorova (Ulan-Ude). The survey conducted by the author showed that in cities, as well as in rural areas, the most common answer was "I consider myself to be a religious person". Among Orthodox Christians, 53% of urban residents identified Buddhism as a religion they sympathize with. 22% of Buddhists answered the same question with Orthodox Christianity. Respondents were also asked to assess the role of religion in modern conditions. The most popular answer among the population of Ulan-Ude is "building tolerance".

Section "Philosophical and Religious systems of Central Asia in historical retrospect".

"Buddhism in the socio-political history of Buryatia during its annexation to Russia" is the topic of the report by L. E. Yangutov (Ulan-Ude). The establishment of the border between the Russian and Qing empires under the Burin Treaty of 1727 divided the Buryat tribes and the Mongol world, the speaker noted, but did not interrupt trade, cultural and family-related contacts between them. Especially significant were the connections with the field of religion. Buddhism became, on the one hand, an ideological factor in consolidating the Buryat clans in the conditions of their dependence on the tsarist power,

page 144
on the other - a spiritual and cultural bridge connecting them with related tribes that remained on the other side of the border. But, despite the consolidating role of Buddhism within the framework of spiritual and cultural values, the decisive factor in consolidating the Buryat clans was not Buddhism, but the policy of the tsarist government in relation to the Buryat clans, which were previously under the direct influence of Mongolian feudal lords. In the "Instructions to Border patrol officers" of 1728, the basic principles of managing the Buryat population of Transbaikalia were formulated, according to which generic groups were given the importance of administrative departments, and a system of administrative hierarchy was outlined. The principles of administrative division proposed by the tsarist government determined the relative stability of social relations within the tribal organization.

N. D. Bolsokhoeva's report (Ulan-Ude) discussed the contribution of Kenzur Khambo Lama Ch. D. Iroltuev (1843-1918) contributed to the development and transformation of Tibetan medical education in the Atsagat Manba Datsan. The speaker noted that Ch. Iroltuev, after resigning from the post of khambolama, organized a school of Tibetan-Mongolian medicine at his own expense, practiced as an emchi healer himself, and developed a prescription guide for more than 300 diseases. The report also noted the role of Iroltuev in the treatment of the royal family by means of Tibetan medicine, as well as his activities in organizing infirmaries during the Russo-Japanese war.

Actual problems of preserving and using places of worship and sacred territories in Buryatia were studied in the report of B. Ts. Gomboev (Ulan-Ude). With the dynamic development of legal regulation in the field of protection of cultural and natural heritage objects, religious and sacred sites can be placed under protection in the form of either specially protected territories or places of interest. A precedent has already been set for the creation of new protected areas, which may give an impetus to the creation and development of other territories that are no less valuable in natural and cultural terms.

I. S. Tsyrempilova (Ulan-Ude) addressed the topic "Regional power and the Russian Orthodox Church in Buryatia in the 1920s and 1930s". During the period under review, all major religious confessions were represented on the territory of Buryatia, not counting sects, societies and groups of believers of various kinds. After the formation of the Buryat-Mongolian ASSR (1923), registration of religious societies began. In the second half of the 1930s, a final blow was dealt to religion in Buryatia, as a result of which the religious issue was "finally resolved"by 1940. However, attempts to eradicate the religious worldview and plant atheistic ideology did not bring the expected results. The authorities failed to control the religious life of society, and believers became "internal emigrants" and led a deeply hidden religious life.

S. V. Vasilyeva (Ulan-Ude) examined the Old Believer communities of the Baikal region during the period of"militant atheism". In the 1920s and 1930s, the authorities created a strict system for identifying and registering religious associations and supervising the Old Believers. Decrees and decrees of the Soviet government on cults forced believers to follow the path of legalizing their activities and giving legal status to their religious associations.

New facts from the history of the Buryat-Mongolian regional Union of militant atheists, obtained as a result of research of archival materials of the National Archive of the Republic of Buryatia, were reported in the report of V. Ts. Lyksokova and Ts. P. Vannikova (both in Ulan-Ude). The activities of the Union of Atheists were the focus of the Party's Central Committee.

G. E. Manzanov (Ulan-Ude) based on his sociological research reviewed the current state of Buddhism in the Baikal region. Studies conducted in 1999, 2003, and 2011 showed that the most stable component of the religious complex is everyday religious rituals. Currently, the Buryat population takes an active part in datsan, general status and family religious rites. These rites play an important role in the social and family life of Buryats, as they consecrate all the main social foundations and connections within the tribal and administrative-territorial community.

S. Y. Lepekhov (Ulan-Ude) in his report "Buddhist Revival and Science in Buryatia" drew attention to the fact that the leading figures of the Buryat Buddhist Renovationism, coming from families that professed traditional Buddhism, mostly received education at St. Petersburg University and were closely connected with academic circles. It is no coincidence that later all of them were initiators and heads of the first scientific institutions in Buryatia. Because of this, many provisions of the Buryat Buddhist renewal program were formed under the influence of scientific Buddhology at the beginning of the XX century and sometimes diverged.

page 145
they came into conflict with the principles of traditional Buryat Buddhism. After the defeat of Buddhism in the 1930s, it was the scientific institutions of Ulan-Ude that gave the few surviving lamas the opportunity to apply their knowledge in research related to Tibetological, Buddhist issues, and Indo-Tibetan medicine.

P. K. Varnavsky (Ulan-Ude) studied the interaction of religion and science in the Republic of Buryatia. The speaker notes that while the long-term strategic goals of Orthodoxy and Buddhism are similar, there is a significant difference in their tactics.

The Orthodox Church emphasizes the limitations of scientific knowledge - it is possible only within the narrow framework of empirical experience and logical inference, while fundamental questions of the universe, human ethics and morality can be solved only with the help of religion (Orthodox Christian). The Orthodox Church seeks to strengthen its position in society through the education system. Buddhists, on the contrary, do not seek the clericalization of school education at all, being supporters of preserving its secular character. But unlike the Orthodox, they quite actively insist that Buddhism has a lot in common with modern science, and if we cannot talk about their full-fledged synthesis, then, in any case, we can expect close and profitable interaction.

Despite such a noticeable difference in the actions of the Orthodox and Buddhist churches, the results that they can achieve in the future, the speaker concludes, will be approximately the same. Both of them will strengthen their cultural, social, and political positions in society by mastering and partially appropriating institutions that were previously at the monopoly disposal of those who represented exclusively the forces of secularization.

The topic of the spread of Protestantism among modern Buryats interested S. D. Batomunkuyev (Ulan-Ude). The phenomenon of Protestantism among Buryats is explained not so much by changes in the religious policy of the state, but rather by socio-cultural processes that have taken place in society during the previous decades. The spread of Protestantism among Buryats at the beginning of the XXI century made clear one of the socio-cultural intentions - the intention to Western civilization. The Buryats, being part of the USSR, were in the zone of cultural influence of Western civilization. As a result, the eastern, Buryat nomadic society in its civilizational characteristics began to represent a Western-Eastern socio-cultural symbiosis, and the values and standards of the Western way of life became an integral part of the mentality of Buryats (at least urban ones), which somehow predisposed them to accept Christianity in search of an answer to religious questions.

L. L. Abayeva (Ulan-Ude) studied the traditional worldview of the Mongolian peoples in the locus of space and time. The worldview of the Mongolian ethnosphere is a system of views that has developed in their nomadic space as a specific and unique reaction to the environment, their place in it, which also records their attitude to the world around them, as well as their main life positions, beliefs, ideals and value orientations determined by these views. The specific culture of spiritual values, moral views, behavioral programs and motivations, as well as the unique perception of space and time within the framework of the nomadic civilization created by them - all these categories are organically included in the system of traditional worldview of all Mongolian peoples, forming a kind of locus of their existence.

Nawang Zopa (India) focused in his report on the main provisions of the Buddha's teaching on social community. N. V. Pupysheva (Ulan-Ude) considered such a basic concept of Tibetan medicine as the system of "great elements" (mahabhut). Tibetan Buddhist medicine and European medicine, she noted, have the same object of research-a person in his relationship with the outside world. However, the conceptual concepts of Tibetan medicine about the world and about man are very different from European ones; Buddhism sees and classifies the same phenomena in a different way, based on the fundamental model of worldview. Nevertheless, the conceptual schemes of Tibetan medicine have a practical meaning, which is confirmed by instrumental measurements.

S. G. Zhambalova (Ulan-Ude) came to the conclusion that this problem in the modern Buryat society is relevant only for Buryat shamanists in her report "On the issue of distinguishing the roles of the old man and the shaman in the Buryat society".

D. V. Ayusheeva (Ulan-Ude) considered the ethical principles of Tibetan Buddhism in modern social reality.

Section "Folklore and Literature in the spiritual heritage of Russia and Central Asia".

A.D. Vasiliev and D. D. Vasiliev (both Moscow) drew attention in their report to the relics of the Mongols ' stay in Asia Minor in Turkish legends and toponymy. Settled in Asia Minor

page 146
the Mongols, assimilating, disowned for about a hundred years and received the local population's ethnic name Kara-Tatar-turkmenleri. They introduced terms related to the designation of certain professions or occupations into the Ottoman-Turkish language. There are also a significant number of qualitative adjectives that may also be derived from Mongolian roots. The vocabulary of Mongolian origin is particularly stable in Anatolian dialects.

Genre trends-updating poetics at the expense of folk art in modern Khakass drama-were considered in the report of N. S. Mainagasheva (Abakan). The topic of the report of R. P. Matveeva (Ulan-Ude) is the Orthodox worldview in the folklore prose of Russian old-timers of Baikal Siberia. The report of D. A. Suseeva and A. T. Kharayeva (both Elista) highlights the geopolitical views of Khan Ayuki, reconstructed on the basis of historical documents. E. E. Baldanmaksarova (Ulan-Ude) considered the question of how ethno-cultural identity is reflected in modern Buryat literature. The problem of ethno-cultural identity is not reduced to the "we - they" dilemma, but such an immanent quality of identity as integrativity, which implies internal multiplicity and dialogue, is brought to the fore.

L. S. Dampilov's report (Ulan-Ude)was devoted to the contemporary poetry of the Buryats of China on the example of the poetess N. Tsymzhid. The problem of nomadic culture and the history of the Turkic-Mongolian tribes are important for N. Tsymzhid's work. The report of A. F. Ilimbetova (Ufa) was devoted to the image of the mythical Samrigush bird from Bashkir folklore. Based on the materials studied, the speaker suggested that the ancient Bashkirs had ideas about Samrau/Samrigushe as one of the manifestations of the deified eagle was born under the influence of the Iranian epic.

The problem of interethnic interaction in the context of the folk narrative culture of the Russian population of Eastern Siberia was discussed in the report of E. L. Tikhonova (Ulan-Ude).

L. Ts. Sanzheeva (Ulan-Ude) analyzed the Buryat Geseriad in the context of historical and ethnic relations. Sacrifice to the White Elder by Buryat shamans of Mongolia - topic of the report by S. Dulam (Mongolia).

L. C. Malzurova (Ulan-Ude) reviewed B. Baradin's drama "The Great Shaman's Sister". The report of L. D. Dashieva (Ulan-Ude) was devoted to the musical and cultural traditions and connection of Buryat uligers and shamanic chants. The results of intonation analysis, the report notes, indicate the common origins of the epic and shamanic music of the Buryats, which influenced the kulyurogeny of the Buryat people. The author suggests that the formation of the Buryat traditional culture took place in the ancient Turkic period and the relic genres of traditional Buryat music, which include uligers and shamanic chants, were inherited from the ancestors of the Proto-Buryats, the ancient Turkic tribe of Kurykans. Ulan-Od (China) spoke about the development of literature in Inner Mongolia.

Section "Languages and written language of the peoples of Central Asia".

B. D. Tsyrenov (Ulan-Ude) analyzed the grammatical characteristics of heading units in the Buryat-Russian and Russian-Buryat dictionaries. E. P. Mamysheva (Abakan) noted the peculiarities of Romanization of the Khakass alphabet in the 1930s. According to Khakass philologists, the Romanization of alphabets was one of the mistakes of the national policy of the state. In the process of using the romanized alphabet, it turned out that it has many disadvantages. In particular, writing in the Latin alphabet inaccurately conveyed the phonetic system of languages and was not popular among the people, it was difficult to introduce it into the practice of school teaching.

Tsybenova's report (Ulan-Ude) was devoted to the functioning of the Mongolian language in Tuva. Today, Tuvan-Mongolian bilingualism is typical only for a small part of the population-mainly for representatives of the older generation engaged in traditional activities-cattle breeding, and for residents of border settlements (Sumons Kachyk, Naryn, Moren in the Erzya region). Some people from border areas generally use spoken Mongolian as a small group language, a "secret" language, in urban or other environments. This type of bilingualism does not have any institutional support; its territorially determined nature is now of purely scientific interest.

In the report of N. I. Ivanova (Yakutia), interlanguage tolerance was studied in a sociolinguistic context. It noted that the trends of ethnocentrism in the dominant Yakut-speaking community are currently manifested to a moderate extent. However, today the desire for equal-status contact on the part of the Yakuts, which sometimes leads Russians to tensions in interethnic relations, cannot but affect inter-linguistic interaction. Heterostereotype (Yakut language in Russian representations) as an element of identity and as an indicator of relations

page 147
in this case, it is very revealing. During the survey, many responses were received about the inability of the Yakut language to serve any communication sphere, although in reality the Yakut language is actively functioning in a number of these areas (in the media, in the field of education, for example). Thus, in any interpretation, the conflict zone is clearly marked, which, due to some expansion of the functions of the Yakut language, is represented in the form of biases. At the same time, the Yakut autostereotypes reflect the absence of hyperbolization of ethnic identity, which negatively affects tolerance, are adequate to the actual functional state of the Yakut language in these areas, and objectify the average native Yakut citizen. In general, the reasons for the phenomenon, according to the speaker, are quite clear and essentially objective - a new balance of languages is being established, especially in the capital of the republic, and, I must say, in many ways closer to harmonious bilingualism than before in the 1970s-1980s, and even in the 1990s. Consequently, the speaker concludes, adaptation phenomena begin among Russian speakers, both among Russians and Yakuts - their speech behavior, language orientations, and preferences gradually undergo some changes.

The round table" Buddhism and Science: dialogue and interaction in the modern world " discussed the results of research in such areas as: Tibetan medicine, modern natural science, literary studies, source studies, historiography. Presentations were made by: I. S. Urbanaeva, A. L. Bazarov, S. M. Nikolaev, V. V. Mantatov, L. E. Yangutov, Ts. P. Vannikova, S. P. Nesterkin, B. S. Dugarov, S. Yu. Lepekhov, V. V. Boronoev, L. G. Sandakova, L. L. Abayeva, N. V. Pupysheva, A. A. Kacharov.

Actual problems of morphology and word formation of modern Mongolian languages (Khalkha-Mongolian, Kalmyk, Buryat) were discussed at the round table "Problems of morphology and word formation of Mongolian languages". The discussion was attended by: L. D. Shagdarov, D. A. Suseeva, Ts. Onorbayan, D. Sh. Haranutova, Yu. D. Badmaeva, L. B. Badmaeva, A. Bumbar, B. D. Tsyrenov, E. A. Bardamova, B. Tuvshintogs, G. N. Chimitdorzhieva, D. Ganchimeg.

The heads of sections and round tables, when summing up the results at the final plenary session, noted that the knowledge of modern problems is impossible without an in-depth study of the history and culture of peoples. It was emphasized that in the context of globalization, the cross-border nature of economic ties is strengthening, the experience of interaction between peoples and civilizations is expanding, and the role of the Mongolian world is growing as a kind of bridge that unites various powers and provides additional opportunities for mutually beneficial cooperation, since economic relations are based on a strong cultural foundation.

page 148

Permanent link to this publication: