AssylbekovaZh.
M.-A., doctor of historical sciences,
Al-FarabiKazNU
professor,
050043 Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty,
micro district Taugul-1, building 51, apt 9
OTTO MAENCHEN-HELFEN – A HISTORIAN AND AN ORIENTALIST
When I worked on
the theme of the western historiography of ancient and medieval history of
Central Asia the first book in my list of obligatory scientific literature was
the remarkable book of an Austrian orientalist Otto Maenchen-Helfen “World of
Huns. The study of their history and culture”. I admirea scholarship,
encyclopedic knowledgeandintellectual levelof the author. For
me,he is an exampleof a great scientist, a modelof the
highest professionalism, faithfulnessto human
andscientific principles.I think that thescientific heritage ofMaenchen-Helfen deserves to beremembered.
OttoMaenchen-Helfen(26.07.1894-29.01.1969) – the eminent Austrianhistorian, orientalist, writer and traveler. Hewas a Marxistin his
ideologicalviews and sympathized withthe Soviet UnionHeworkedat the Marx-Engels
Institute in Moscow in 1927-1930, theninBerlinin1930-1933. When the Nazis came to power in Germany, he returned to Austria, and
after the Anschluss in 1938 he emigrated to the United States, eventually becoming a professor
at the University of California, Berkeley. This historian hadbroad scientificinterests. He left several compositions
onorientalism: “Huns and Hsiung-Nu”, “Legend of the origin of the Huns”, “Manicheans
in Siberia”,“The World of the Huns. The study of their history and culture”, “Journey
to Tuva”. He also left a serious work about the life and work of Karl Marx.
All his life he was
fascinated by the problems of the frontier. He expressed a big interest to
archaeology in childhood. As aboy he dug Roman copper coins along the remnants
of the earthen walls that, as late as the 17th century protected
Vienna his native town from the East. His doctoral dissertation dealt with the
“barbarian” element in Han lore. In 1929 he lived for months in the tents of
Turkic-speaking nomads in northwestern Mongolia, where the clash between
“higher civilization” represented by Tibetan Lamaism, and the “primitive” beliefs
of the Turks was strikingly visible. In Kashmirthe researcher got acquaintance with
the findings of Kushan times. He spent many days in the museum at Minusinsk in southern
Siberia studying the “Scythian” bronze plaques and cauldrons. In Kabul O. Maenchen-Helfen
saw the inscriptions from Surkh Kotal and as he said: “It brought back to me
the problems of the barbarians at Chine s border about which I had written a
good deal in previous years” [1].
OttoMaenchen-Helfenwroteabook“JourneytoTuva”(Reise ins
AsiatisheTuwa, published in German in 1931). This study was translated in
English in 1992.Hardly anyone outside Russia ever wrote about Tuva, there are
only a few extant pictures, few foreigners ever even saw it in its days of
independence (1921-1944) With considerable difficulty, and only because O.
Maenchen- Helfen was teaching ethnology and sociology at the Marx-Engels
Institute in Moscow at the time, the author managed to get to Tuva and become
the only Westerner to write a book about that small, “independent” republic
before its entry into the USSR. The historiantellsabout this
landand its people, culture, reveals a widerange of issues(the
government, conditionsof life,cattle rearing, agriculture, etc.)
He had one more
theme that has been haunting him as far back as he can recall- Attila and his
avatars”[2].His book “The World of the Huns. Study of their history and
culture” became one of the most fundamental works ever published on the history
of the Huns.Professor Otto Maenchen-Helfen developed a large-scale problem of
the history of the Huns and related peoples for many years. After his death he
left an unfinished manuscript. It was a source of the book “World of Huns.
Study of their history and culture.” which was published in 1973 by Berkeley,
University of California Press.
O. Maenchen-Helfen
differed from other historians of Eurasia in his unique competence in
philology, archaeology, and the history of art. He did not need to guess the
identities of tribes, populations, or cities. He knew the primary texts,
whether in Greek or Russian or Persian or Chinese. This linguistic ability is
particularly necessary in the study of the Huns and their nomadic cognates,
since the name “Hun” has been applied to many peoples of different ethnic
character, including Ostrogoth, Magyars, and Seljuk. Even ancient nomadic
people north of China, the Hsiung-nu, not related to any of these, were called
“Hun” by their Sogdian neighbors. Maenchen-Helfen knew the Chinese sources that
tell of the Hsiung-nu, and thus could evaluate the relationship of these
sources to European sources of Hunnic history [3].
Another
special competence was his expertise in the history of Asian art, a subject
that he taught for many years. Maenchen-Helfen’s description of technical and
stylistic consistencies among metal articles from Hunnic tombs in widely
separated localities dispels the myth of supposed Hunnic ignorance of
metal-working skills. Maenchen-Helfen emphasizes what distinguishes his studies
from previous treatments is the extensive use of archaeological material: “In
recent years archeological research has been progressing at such speed that I
had to modify my views repeatedly while I was working on these studies” [4].
To Maenchen-Helfen archaeological evidence
played a critical role in the determination of the origin of the Huns and their
geographical distribution in ancient and early medieval times, as well as the
extent of Hunnic penetration into eastern Europe and their point of entry into
Hungarian plain [5].
He
underlines the necessity for sharp and well-reasoned criticism of the sources
of the Huns: “From the beginning these peoples were denigrated and demonized by
European historians and dismissed as avatars of the eternal but faceless
barbarian hordes from the east, against whom vigilance was always necessary,
but whose precise identity was of little importance”. Otto Maenchen-Helfen
criticizes hatred, fear of many Western European authors towards to the Huns:
“The same fierce hatred burned in AmmianusMarcellinus. He and the other writes
of the fourth and fifth centuries depicted the Huns as the savage monsters
which we still see today. Hatred and fear distorted the picture of the Huns
from the moment they appeared on the lower Danube. Unless this tendentiousness
is fully understood – and it rarely is- the literary evident is found to be
misread.” So he begins his study with its reexamination [6].
According
to some authoritative scholars Otto Maenchen-Helfen in his book: “World of
Huns. Study of their history and culture” presented to us “the epic character
of the great drama that took place on the Eurasian stage early in our era, the
clash of armies and the interaction of civilizations. This book is a standard
treatise not likely to be superseded in the predictable future” [7]. In his
research Otto Maenchen-Helfen expresses humanity in such a racially charged
field as Hunnic studies, it was a rare phenomenon in the German historiography
of 30th years of XX century. The novelty and distinctive
characteristic of Maenchen-Helfen’s research is seen in his ability to create a
reliable account of the ancestors of the Turks and Mongols, free of the usual
Western prejudice and linguistic limitations.
OttoMaenchen-Helfenmadean
invaluable contribution tothewestern historiography ofthe history
ofCentralAsia.His writingsare still relevantandinteresting tomodern historians,
and are an exampleof highlyprofessional research.
1.
Maenchen-HelfenOtto.
TheworldoftheHuns. Studies in their history and culture. University of
California press, Berkeley, 1973, p. XXIV.
2.
.
3.
, p. XV.
4.
,pp. XVI-XVII
5.
,p. XVI.
6. ,p. XXIV.
7. ,p. XVII.