https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 3, 2025
513
THE FORMATION OF HISTORIOGRAPHY IN UZBEKISTAN AT THE BEGINNING
OF THE 20TH CENTURY
Zokirov Umrbek Shokirovich
Master in the specialty of History, Source Studies and
Historical Research Methods
National University of Uzbekistan
Abstract:
This article explores the intellectual and institutional emergence of historiography in
Uzbekistan during the early 20th century—a period marked by political transformations, cultural
renaissance, and national awakening. The formation of modern historical thought was influenced
by the intersection of traditional Islamic scholarship, Jadidism, colonial Russian academic
policies, and early Soviet ideological paradigms. Through the analysis of historical texts,
educational reforms, and the activities of prominent historians, this study reveals the
complexities of how Uzbek historiography was conceptualized, constructed, and contested in the
transition from imperial to Soviet rule. The article further evaluates the historiographical legacy
of this period and its influence on subsequent national history writing in Uzbekistan.
Kеywоrds:
Historiography, Uzbekistan, early 20th century, Jadidism, colonial scholarship,
national identity, Soviet history, intellectual tradition.
INTRОDUСTIОN
The beginning of the 20th century was a watershed moment for the development of national
consciousness and intellectual modernity in Central Asia, particularly in Uzbekistan. This era
saw the gradual emergence of historical scholarship that sought to document, reinterpret, and
reclaim the region’s rich past in light of new political realities. Prior to this period, historical
writing in Central Asia was predominantly shaped by court chronicles and Islamic scholastic
traditions, often emphasizing dynastic legitimacy, religious themes, and moral instruction rather
than critical historiographical methods [1].
However, with the expansion of the Russian Empire into Central Asia in the late 19th century,
new historiographical influences began to permeate the intellectual life of the region. Russian
orientalists, military administrators, and ethnographers introduced new tools of documentation,
archive work, and chronology. At the same time, the rise of the Jadid movement—a modernist
reform initiative among Turkic Muslims—brought about a rethinking of education, national
identity, and the role of history in shaping collective memory. It is within this intersection of
empire, reform, and awakening that Uzbek historiography began to take a modern form.
MАTЕRIАLS АND MЕTHОDS
Prior to the 20th century, historical writing in Uzbekistan was largely embedded within Islamic
epistemological frameworks. Works such as Tarixi Mulki Ambar, Shajarayi Turk, and
Nasafiynoma reflected a worldview grounded in religious cosmology and moral paradigms.
Historians often operated as chroniclers of rulers, custodians of genealogies, and preservers of
hadith and Islamic ethics. Though these works were invaluable in preserving historical data, they
lacked systematic source criticism and methodological objectivity [2].
Nevertheless, these traditions provided an essential foundation for emerging historiographical
currents. Many early 20th-century historians were themselves products of madrasah education,
deeply familiar with Arabic, Persian, and Chagatai sources. Their transformation into modern
historians was a gradual process that entailed both the preservation of cultural heritage and
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 3, 2025
514
adaptation to new intellectual currents.
RЕSULTS АND DISСUSSIОN
The Jadid reformists, spearheaded by figures such as Mahmudxo‘ja Behbudiy, Abdulla Avloniy,
Munavvarqori Abdurashidxonov, and Fitrat, played a pivotal role in reshaping historical
discourse. They recognized history as a powerful tool for nation-building, moral rejuvenation,
and anti-colonial awareness. Jadid intellectuals began writing and publishing historical works not
merely to glorify the past, but to analyze it critically and derive lessons for the future [3].
Fitrat’s Munozara and O‘zbeklar treatises, for example, questioned why Turkic-Muslim societies
had lagged behind Europe and emphasized the need for self-reflection through historical inquiry.
Historical essays began to appear in Jadid newspapers and journals such as Shuhrat, Taraqqiy,
and Oyna. These writings, though limited in formal methodology, reflected a growing awareness
of historical causality, periodization, and national identity.
Moreover, Jadid educators introduced history as a subject in new-method schools (usul-i jadid
maktablari), where students learned about Timurids, ancient Khorezm, and Islamic civilization
not through rote memorization but through critical engagement with the past. This shift marked a
departure from traditional historiography and laid the groundwork for modern historical thinking.
While Jadidism cultivated an internal intellectual renaissance, Russian imperial scholarship
exerted significant influence through orientalist institutions, archival systems, and translation
initiatives. Russian scholars such as V. V. Bartold, N. I. Veselovsky, and S. F. Oldenburg
conducted extensive research on Central Asian history, often from a colonial perspective. Their
works, though invaluable in terms of source collection, often reflected Eurocentric biases and
served the administrative needs of the empire.
Institutions like the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, local ethnographic commissions, and
state-run schools introduced academic protocols and historical documentation practices. The
publication of Turkestan Collection (Turkestanskiy Sbornik)—a multi-volume compendium of
documents, reports, and studies—provided unprecedented access to both Russian and indigenous
sources. At the same time, the colonial framework restricted native authorship and often silenced
subaltern narratives.
However, these scholarly activities also facilitated the training of local historians, archivists, and
translators. Indigenous scholars who collaborated with Russian orientalists gained access to
methodological tools, paleography, and European historiographical models, which they later
adapted for national purposes during the Soviet era.
СОNСLUSIОN
The formation of historiography in Uzbekistan at the beginning of the 20th century was a
multidimensional and contested process. It emerged at the crossroads of tradition and modernity,
colonization and reform, ideology and scholarship. Traditional Islamic chronicles, Jadid
reformist thought, Russian orientalism, and Soviet academic structures all played a role in
shaping the contours of Uzbek historical writing.
While early efforts may have lacked the methodological rigor of modern academic history, they
succeeded in transforming history into a field of public concern and national self-reflection. The
legacy of this formative period continues to influence contemporary Uzbek historiography,
which seeks to balance critical inquiry with cultural pride and national identity.
A comprehensive understanding of this era is essential for appreciating how historical narratives
are constructed, manipulated, and mobilized in the service of both scholarship and statecraft. The
historiographical developments of early 20th-century Uzbekistan remain not only a record of
intellectual awakening but also a mirror of the political transformations that reshaped Central
Asia.
RЕFЕRЕNСЕS
1.
1.Khalid, A. (1998). The Politics of Muslim Cultural Reform: Jadidism in Central Asia.
University of California Press.
2.
2.Bartold, V. V. (1963). Works on the History of Central Asia. Moscow: Nauka
Publishing.
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 3, 2025
515
3.
3.Abdurashidov, M. (2005). Stages of the formation of Uzbek historiography. Tashkent:
Fan.
4.
4.Ziyayev, A. (2000). National history and historiography. Tashkent: Sharq.
