The following is a posthumous publication of S. M. Shirokogorov's article titled «Tungus Literary Language”, one of those articles of which only titles are known to us but which have never been published. In this respect, we dare say that it is the publication of a long-awaited bequest from Shirokogorov to the scholarly public.
Sergei Mikhailovich Shirokogorov (Shirokogoroff, according to his own transcription) was a Russian ethnologist famous for his Tungusic studies, including Social Organization of the Manchus (1924), Social Organization of the Northern Tungus (1929), and Psychomental Complex of the Tungus (1935) [l]. Here we are not going to deal with his biography in detail, for it should be, we believe, the theme of quite another work. Nevertheless, it will be necessary to touch upon his life, even though briefly.
Shirokogorov was born in 1889 near an old town, Suzdal', in Central Russia. After being educated at home in the classics, he went to France in 1906, where he studied first in l'Universite de Paris, and then at l'Ecole d'Anthropologie. When he came back to Russia in 1910, he began his academic career at St Petersburg University and also in the Imperial Academy of Sciences. In 1912 he tried a field expedition for the first time to Zabaikalia, and from 1913 to 1917 traveled widely in Siberia (Zabaikalia, Amur, and Yakutsk provinces) and also in the northeast of China, engaging in ethnological, archaeological, and linguistic field surveys. After the Russian October Revolution, he lived in Vladivostok (1918-1922), taking care of the anthropological division of the Far Eastern University. Thence he emigrated to China, where he taught at the universities of Shanghai, Amoy, and Canton (1922-1930); from 1930 onwards he lived in Peking, teaching at the universities of Fujen and Tsinghua, while engaging in scientific research in Fukian, Canton, and Yunnan provinces, as well as in the northeastern district of China. He died in Peking on 19 October 1939 [2].
Generally speaking, Shirokogorov was not only a field ethnographer but also a scholar of theoretical ethnology and linguistics (cf. his publications concerning the «ethnos” or «ethnical units”, as well as a series of academic polemics with leading authorities). Nonetheless, we might say that he was one of the greatest «Tungusologues”,one of the «Pleiad” in Tungusic studies.
The typescript of «Tungus Literary Language” is preserved in the Library of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Krakow (in the archival section, registered as < Syg. 4605 >, where it comprises 19 sheets of old, poor-quality paper, paginated by the archivist from 56 to 74) [3]. I came across it quite by chance when I was looking for the materials of Bronislaw Pilsudski, among papers which had been in the possession of the late professor W. Kotwicz.
This typescript seemed to be ready for printing, even though it had several irregular handwritten and typed insertions. However, on the attached sheet (p. 75) I found a registered-mail direction, addressed to S. M. Shirokogorov in «Pekin, China,” and the sender's address stamped as «Polskie Towarzystwo Orjentalis-tyczne, Lwow” (The Polish Society of Orient Studies, Lwow). Moreover, in the right margin is written in faint pencil: «Drukowane nie bylo, MK»(It was not printed, MK). What seems to have happened is the following.
In 1939 [4] Shirokogorov sent this typescript to W. Kotwicz to be published in Rocznik Orjentalistyczny, the journal of the «Polskie Towarzystwo Orjentalistyczne», [5] since Kotwicz was then editor-in-chief of this journal. However, the editor-in-chief decided for some reason not to print and to send it back to the author. Nevertheless, the typescript was not sent out but left with Kotwicz, perhaps because of the author's death, or perhaps because of the outbreak of war, but most probably for both reasons. But why did Kotwicz determine not to publish the Shirokogorov article in his journal?
First, I suppose that Kotwicz might have been worried about possible Soviet reactions toward Poland if he published an article that concluded by saying «the Literary Tungus Language has no scientific value, nor any future”. Shirokogorov's conclusion is, it is true, far more academic than political; nevertheless, this article could scarcely be printed in Poland even now. This is why, I presume, Shirokogorov's typescript has not been published for half a century. Second, Kotwicz might have judged that the typescript was not finished yet, from rhetorical as well as stylistic points of view; in other words, Shirokogorov's English left room for much editing and polishing. The author presumably wrote his English text quite hurriedly [6]. Hence, the editor-in-chief might have, I believe, found it impossible to put the manuscript into print as it stood. (As a matter of fact, exactly the same question confronted me. At first I thought that my task would simply be to re-edit the typescript with minor modifications, but eventually I was obliged to modify the original text considerably, so that a reader with no knowledge of the Russian language might make sense of it. Although I have done my best to preserve his thought, I must be held responsible for its final form. I hope only that I have not distorted the author's meaning.)
Meanwhile, the existence of «Tungus Literary Language” was not only known to us, there even existed in Japan another typescript with the same title. According to the postscript of the Japanese translation of Social Organization of the Northern Tungus, the translators had obtained from Mrs E. N. Shirokogorova (Shirokogorov's widow) a detailed list of her husband's published works, as well as a list of those which were left unpublished. The latter contained six items, among which was «2) Tungus Literary Language (1939, 19 typewritten pages)”. Judging from the identical title and number of pages, I feel safe in concluding that both typescripts are in principle the same and even were prepared at the same time, though slight differences are conceivable owing to later retouchings. What is more important is the indication that this article was completed in 1939, the last year of the author's life.
In the spring of 1943 a Japanese scholar, Yasumoto Tokunaga, received from Mrs Shirokogorova in Peking three typescript items and a manuscript copy of «A Tungus Dictionary” to be published in Japan. Tokunaga (now professor in Kansai University of Foreign Studies) managed to bring them to Japan. Although he says that he can no longer tell exactly how those typescript items were titled, it is almost certain that they consisted of the following three items: 1) «Vocalic Harmony and Vocalic Associations in Tungus”, 2) «Tungus Literary. Language”, and 3) «Ethnographic Investigation of China”. This is because Prof. Tokunaga explains that Mrs Shirokogorova did not deliver the remaining items to him, since they were too voluminous, and she was in the process of typing them. The manuscript was printed photostatically by the Ethnological Society of Japan in 1944 (2nd ed. 1953). All the typescripts, regrettably, were lost in the postwar turmoils in 1945. They were, according to Prof. Tokunaga, kept in the desk of his cabinet in the Institute of Nationalities (Minzoku Kenkyusho), but when the Occupation Army suddenly requisitioned the building, they went out of his control. The S. M. Shirokogorov typescripts, including that of «Tungus Literary Language” have been missing ever since. Were they simply destroyed in the course of requisition, or confiscated by the Occupation Army in view of their scientific value? I prefer the latter possibility to the former, since it leaves room to hope for their rediscovery somewhere in the United States of America. As for the two remaining unpublished items, which Mrs Shirokogorova did not give Tokunaga because of their voluminousness, it is hoped that a serious search will be made for them [7]. So far my inquiries in Peking have borne no fruit.
Needless to say, bringing to light an elusive article by Shirokogorov may have value by itself [8]. But the significance of its publication goes beyond this, for three reasons.
First, his article is a sort of contemporary documentary on the Tungus language of Siberia for a decade beginning from 1924. This corresponds to the era of «Latinization” in Soviet history, on which too little light has been shed so far. Later, as is well known, Soviet authorities switched their language policy to «Russification”, i.e., replacement of Latin with Cyrilic letters for all the newly created literary languages. Therefore, he was a very rare and valuable observer of this short-lived, poorly documented period.
Second, his arguments are relevant to quite a vivid question of today: whether literary languages should be constructed for the minority language groups, or not. If the answer is affirmative, the next question is how? Although he sharply argues against the policy, procedures, and results of the Soviet authorities and their collaborators, it is true that his arguments are not always objective. Moreover, we find it rather difficult to determine what his own answer would be to the above question. It seems that he intentionally chose the stance of antagonist, since as a matter of fact he had nothing to do with policy — and decision-making in the actual process. One must remember that he wrote down his thoughts as he contemplated the problem of faraway Siberia from his study in Peking. Nevertheless, his burning protestations are well worth careful attention.
Third, some of his predictions are worth seeing again. He forecast the inevitable denationalization of the Tungus and the extinction of the «Tungus Literary Language”. It appears that he did not want the former to happen but was in favor of the latter, even making bold to declare that |Literary Tungus” had no «future”. If he were to witness the present state of both, what would he say? One thing can be said: what Shirokogorov described as an artificial, simplified, and children's language still survives as the «Tungus Literary Language”, although «Cyrilized” once more «owing to the personal energy of G. M. Vasilevich”. According to a Soviet source, there were 3,370 Tungus (Evenki) speakers who declared Evenki their mother tongue (13.7 per cent of the whole Evenki population, 24,600 in 1959) [9]. Is it on the way to extinction, or to development?
I have for several years been visiting Hulunbuir in north-eastern China, engaging in field surveys of the Tungus (Evenki) population there. Whenever the Chinese Evenki showed a keen interest in establishing a writing system for their speech (the Solon dialect), I couldn't help but recall Shirokogorov's emphasis on the initiative and participation of the speakers concerned. If Shirokogorov were alive now, he could be the best consultant for their enterprise. What this means is that he passed away more than half a century too early.
On the 50th anniversary of the death of S. M. Shirokogorov,19 October 1989
1. See the attached bibliography of Shirokogorov's works prepared by me on the basis of the one Mrs Shirokogorova herself compiled, which was published in the Japanese translation of Social Organization of the Northern Tungus (Tokyo, 1941; pp. 87-91). I was able to add several titles to it. Furthermore, I have tried as far as possible to confirm the data in Mrs Shirokogorova's list. It is a happy coincidence that the article «Tungus Literary Language” should appear in Asian Folklore Studies, where the first posthumous publication of a work by Shirokogorov, «Ethnographic Investigation of China” also appeared 49 years ago (it was the lead article in the initial number of Folklore Studies, the forerunner of Asian Folklore Studies).
2. This information is taken mainly from the translators' postscript (written by Katsumi Tanaka and Teiro Kawakubo) to Social Organization of the Northern Tungus (713-14).
3. I received official permission to publish this manuscript from the director of the Library of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Krakow, to whom I want to express my sincere gratitude.
4. I was unable to confirm the year when Shirokogorov or his wife dispatched the typescript to W. Kotwicz. But, if we accept the information from Mrs Shirokogorova that it was completed in 1939 (see p. 37 above), then its dispatch could occur only in 1939. Moreover, in his endnote 33 Shirokogorov cited «Vocalic Harmony and Vocalic Associations in Tungus,' in Monumenta Serica, Vol. IV, 1939, Peking”. This article did not appear in the journal, however. In addition, a typescript of the same title is found in the widow's list of unpublished works (see note 6 below). It means for some reason it was not published in Monumenta Serica. Taking everything into account, then, perhaps we should not rule out the slight possibility that «Tungus Literary Language” could have been dispatched in 1938.
5. Shirokogorov had already published articles in Rocznik Orjentalistyczny, vols. IV (1928), VII (1931), and X (1934). For details, confer the Bibliography. Of W. Kotwicz, Shirokogorov states in his foreword to Social Organization of the Northern Tungus (v), «Before setting forth on these investigations [the expeditions of 1912-131, I received very valuable advice in linguistic field work from W. L. Kotwicz, Professor of the Lwow University (Poland), at that time connected with the St. Petersburg University, and Member of the Russian Committee for the Exploration of Middle and Eastern Asia”. It appears that their friendly relationship (see p. x of the same work) had its start then.
6. His English text is a clear witness that he not only wrote it «hurriedly”, but also omitted having it checked by native English speakers, a process his other texts, such as the monographs on the Manchus and on the Tungus, underwent (he expresses «sincere thanks” to them in the forewords). Moreover, he clearly speaks about his reluctance to publish his ideas in English: «Another objection to publication was that my material must be published in English, which for me was a language neither native nor even sufficiently well studied to enable me to express myself with desirable clarity and in a style not offending the feeling of language among the English-speaking people. Indeed, I would be in a much more advantageous position if I could use my own language in this study” (Social Organization of the Northern Tungus, viii).
7. For the sake of the completeness of the Bibliography, I cite here the whole list of Shirokogorov's unpublished works, compiled by his wife (see note 1 above). 1) Vocalic Harmony and Vocalic Association in the Tungus Languages (58 typewritten pages, 1939). 2) Tungus Literary Language (19 typewritten pages, 1939). 3) Ethnographic Investigation of China (35 typewritten pages, 1939) [an article under the same title was published in Folklore Studies in 1942; see Bibliography and note 11. 4) Growth and Ethnos (a huge volume, ca. 1931). 5) Linguistical Materials, Vol. II (a Tungus-Russian dictionary, containing approximately 30,000 words, and a folklore collection) [it appears that the dictionary was printed in 1944, reprinted in 1953]. 6) Ethnology (a monumental work, written from 1936 onwards and completed [?] in 1939, consisting of 2 volumes (7 parts, 35 chapters) [this appears to be Shirokogorov's lifework].
8. According to Prof. Jiro Ikegami, a leading Japanese Tungusologue, it was expressly stated in the Twenty-third Meeting of PIAC, held in Austria in 1980, that Shirokogorov's missing works should be seriously searched for (cf. Jiro Ikegami's «The Twenty-third Meeting of the Permanent International Altaic Conference (PIAC)” [in Japanese], The Toyo Gakuho 62/3-4, 1981 : 233). While editing «Tungus Literary Language”, I received valuable comments from Prof. Ikegami, and I want to express here my heartfelt gratitude.
9. Население земного шара. Справочник по странам (Moscow, 1965), p. 57.