Jan Assman's theory of cultural memory and formation of the image of Genghis Khan on the example of "The secret legend of the Mongols" and "The novel about Genghis Khan" of the franciscan mission of Giovanni da Pian del Carpine

This article is dedicated to the research of the emergence of such phenomenon as memory studies. This article describes the first scientists who studied the problems of collective memory. Also, this article is devoted to continuity in the concept of Jan Assman’s theory. The theory of Jan Assman is central for the research in this article. The purpose of this article is to verify and test the theory of Jan Assman on an idiographic material (Mongolian society of the mid-13th century). The theory of cultural memory is promising for memory studies. In analysis of the theory of cultural memory, such concepts as “canon” and “figure of memory” are the main point of study. These concepts are important because of their universality in analysis of memory of different social systems. This article is also describing how the theory of Jan Assman is treated in Russian historiography, as well as the fact that in Russian historiography the theory of Aleida Assmann is more popular than the theory of Jan Assman. In this article, the elements of theory of cultural memory are applied to the Mongolian society of the 13 century. This society was chosen due to the fact that in this society the processes of consolidation of various tribes and ethnogenesis are taking place, and these processes are reflected in the cultural memory. By the middle of the 13th century, the image of Genghis Khan had become “figure of memory” in Mongolian society. Different sources are giving us different images of Genghis Khan in the middle of 13th century. For example, in “Secret Legends of the Mongols” we can distinguish several characteristics of Genghis Khan: warrior, general, politician and reformer. His image as politician and reformer is the main point in formation of Genghis Khan as a “figure of memory”. The author of the “Secret Legends of the Mongols” emphasizes on the importanc e of the Genghis Khan’s reformation of army. Personal memories of author are superimposed on both collective memory and legends of Genghis Khan, creating a “canonical” image of Genghis Khan. The author is justifying the brutality of Genghis Khan through the description of his fairness to retinue. Same qualities of Genghis Khan are differently assessed in the “Novel about Genghis Khan” by Carpine (of the Franciscan Mission). The author of this source is focused on the greed and cruelty of the ruler. During the transition from collective to cultural memory, the texts of this period are reflecting quite similar points, such as the unification and conquest of the tribes, but they interpreting them quite differently. Such disagreements can be viewed as the uncertainty of the future path of progress and the struggle in Mongolian society for various development options. Each of the social groups turned to the life and deeds of Genghis Khan as a “figure of memory”. However, subsequently the image of Genghis Khan from the “Secret Legend of the Mongols” will become a canonical image of Genghis Khan and his biography.

Keywords

Authors

References