UTOPÍA Y PRAXIS LATINOAMERICANA. AÑO: 23 , n° 82 (JULIO-SEPTIEMBRE), 2018, pp . 111-120 REVISTA INTERNACIONAL DE FILOSOFÍA Y TEORÍA SOCIAL
CESA-FCES-UNIVERSIDAD DEL ZULIA. MARACAIBO-VENEZUELA.
ISSN 1315-5216 / ISSN-e: 2477-9555
La emigración kazaja y el significado histórico de los recuerdos de Mustafa Shokay
Akerke B. ZHOLMAKHANOVA
ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3148-2757 erke_zh@mail.ru
Department of Kazakh Language and Literature and Journalism,
Korkut Ata Kyzylorda State University, Kyzylorda, Republic of Kazakhstan
Gabit A. TUYAKBAEV
Department of Kazakh Language and Literature and Journalism, Korkut Ata Kyzylorda State University, Kyzylorda, Republic of Kazakhstan
Kuandyk ABDRAZAKOV
Department of Kazakh Language and Literature and Journalism, Korkut Ata Kyzylorda State University, Kyzylorda, Republic of Kazakhstan
Gulzira S. ORALOVA
Department of Pedagogy and Methods of Teaching,
Korkut Ata Kyzylorda State University, Kyzylorda, Republic of Kazakhstan
Bekzhigit K. SERDALI
Department of Kazakh Philology and Journalism,
A. Yassawi International Kazakh-Turkish University, Turkestan, Republic of Kazakhstan
This paper is filed in Zenodo:
DOI: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1495807
The aim of the work is to analyze the Kazakh emigration and the historical significance of the first Kazakh emigrant
M. Shokay memories. In work analyzed the positions of
the Kazakh intelligentsia of the early 20th century in the national liberation struggle are analyzed. The authors show their own point of view on the genre of memoirs. The ways of forming the Kazakh emigration in the article are considered in relation to the social and political events of the beginning of the 20th century. The article traces how Shokay’s positions in the political struggle are reflected in his memoirs.
Keywords: Diaspora; emigrant; ideology; literary criticism.
El objetivo del trabajo es analizar la emigración kazaja y la importancia histórica de los primeros recuerdos del emigrante kazajo, M. Shokay. En el trabajo se analizan las posiciones de la intelligentsia kazaja de principios del siglo XX en la lucha por la liberación nacional. Los autores muestran su propio punto de vista sobre el género de las memorias. Las formas de formar la emigración kazaja en el artículo se consideran en relación con los acontecimientos sociales y políticos de principios del siglo XX. El artículo describe cómo las posiciones de Shokay en la lucha política se reflejan en sus memorias.
Palabras Clave: Diáspora; emigrante; ideología; crítica literaria.
Recibido: 15-07-2018 ● Aceptado: 10-08-2018
Utopía y Praxis Latinoamericana publishes under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0). For more information go to https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/deed
Literature is an art chronicle of the epoch. Memories of historical personalities, state and public figures, historians and representatives of other spheres of science, which traditionally belong to the genre of memoirs, are considered as documentary sources and used in science. For example, E. Bekmakhanov, referring to the sources used by him when working on the study "Қазақстан ХІХ ғасырдың 20-40 жылдарында" (Kazakhstan in the 20-40s of the 19th century) notes: "In addition to the above documentary materials, we used ‘stories’ of various people. These ‘stories’ can be divided into three groups by their nature: 1. stories of Central Asian and Russian merchants who have visited the horde of Kenesary; 2. stories of direct participants of the insurrection; 3. stories of people attached to participants of the insurrection to collect the necessary information (Bekmakhanov, 1994).
These words of the scientist tell that when writing a monographic work about an event in the national history, along with the works of foreign and domestic scientists, archival materials, folklore heritage, he used the memories of people who witnessed those events as historical materials. Man is an active member of society, participating in its creation. Consequently, his memories of the time when he lived, his thoughts and opinions are valuable; the subject’s view of history is important for science, and especially for the humanities.
"Man is not abstract, some otherworldly creature. A man is a person’s world, a state, a society" (Marx and Engels, 1957). This statement by K. Marx clearly characterizes the relationship between man and society. Thus, it can be said that people’s memories of that time, the era when they lived, are of great importance for the knowledge of society. And this, in turn, indicates the value of the memoirs genre from the point of view of history.
Subjective cognition lets through the events of history, evaluates, weighs, suggests and evaluates social life, development of history, historical events and personalities. Let us quote the words of the Russian scientist S.V. Pavlovskaya. She notes: "In modern historical science, more attention is paid to human problems in history, to its inner world, to the perception of historical events. This approach to history significantly expands the complex of historical sources, gives an opportunity to re-examine questions of history that have long been present in science, a huge layer of sources of personal origin (diaries, memoirs, letters) is introduced into research, in which thoughts, feelings, moods, public consciousness, the level of spiritual life, the psychology of people of a certain historical epoch are reflected" (Pavlovskaya, 2006). S.V. Pavlovskaya believes that the genre of memoirs, including memories, has a historical and literary character. Memoirs are a mirror in which the truth of the society is reflected.
"From the point of view of the nature of the genre, memoirs and memories, which are very close to them, require special study: it is necessary to distinguish them from the point of view of ideological and artistic content. Memoirs, essays, diaries, reflections, letters, works of epistolary and information and documentary nature are a significant layer now. All these works are united by one common ideological and artistic thread: they are created on the basis of vital facts, specific documentary materials" (Akysh, 2010). This opinion of the scientist confirms the need for a more detailed study of the genre of memoirs. Indeed, in literary science memoirs are considered within the framework of memoir art works.
For example, the Russian literary critic M. Kuznetsov, analyzing the works of K. Paustovsky "Distant years" and I. Ehrenburg "People, Years, Life", puts purely documentary and artistic and documentary works in a single line. In the work of K. Paustovsky documentation has a conditional character, artistic fiction comes on the foreground. In the work of Ehrenburg, in accordance with the requirements of the chosen genre, great importance is attached to documentation, specific facts.
Similar studies, critical works are also in Kazakh literary criticism. Speaking about the genre of memoirs, in most cases they rely on the memoirs of S. Seifullin, S. Mukanov, G. Musrepov, B. Momyshuly, A. Nurshaikhov and some other writers. And the memories in which the concrete facts are preserved and in which the truth of the life of society is reflected in a certain historical time have not yet been properly evaluated and are not investigated from the point of view of their genre peculiarity. Undoubtedly, it is only natural that in the literature artistic images of this or that historical epoch, historical and eminent personalities are created. In this respect, memoirs occupy a special place, therefore memoir prose is widely represented in the literary process, from the Middle Ages to the present day.
Memories – this is the author’s story about own life, written (narrated) from the first-person perspective; they are dominated by the author’s narrative, based on specific events and facts. In modern literature they perform the function of historical and literary and biographical documents, acquainting with one or another historical personality, with the stages of their life path, with their surroundings, with their character and behavior.
In the dictionary of literary terms "Әдебиеттану" (Literary criticism) the following definition is given: "Memoirs, memories (Fr. Memiores – memoirs) – have the form of biographical narratives, diary entries, travel notes, in which the author narrates about events, which they witnessed or participated in. In whatever form they were written, they are not just memories, but represent a literary work. The form of memoirs, biographical narrative or diary entries is used as an artistic device, showing that the work describes real events and it is based on specific documentary materials.
Along with this, it should be noted that the artistic memoirs select and describe the events of a particular historical period, which have important social and political significance. The writer, talking about these events, depicts the characters of different people, describes their actions, while he tries to preserve those impressions, the mood that these events and people had on him. The feature and advantage of this genre is that the author of the memoirs, describing behavior and actions of different people, narrates about the events, which they witnessed by themselves (Kunaqova, 1998).
We can say that memoirs – are a written historical document in which the author assesses the events that really took place in society, shows the self-awareness of the active participants in these events. In most cases, memories of events, preserved in the author’s memory and witnessed by oneself, are based on one’s personal impressions. A distinctive feature of memoirs is that they can contain facts that are not observed in other documentary sources. Also, memoirs are valuable because social scientists and researchers can find details in them that help to analyze and characterize certain events of the past in more detail. Memoirs focus on concreteness, documentality, signs of journalistic style; artistic reflections and expressive means of language recede into the background. Given these signs, some researchers attribute memoirs to the genre of essays. Basically, this view is held with respect to the memoirs of Russian emigrants.
For example, G.N. Pospelov writes about the genre of essays and memoirs: "One of the most popular genres of memoirs of Russian emigration is an essay. It can be referred to both fiction and journalism. Referring to small epic forms, memoirs are closest to the sketch: they do not have an intricate plot and artistic images". The scientist gives a classification of essays, but does not separately identify the memoir essay. He considers the form of a documentary essay where "facts and phenomena are accurately described" or where "the author gives own explanations and assessment". Despite the fact that the author’s subjectivity is present in the memoir essay and the documentary task is put forward, G.N. Pospelov refers it to the genre of journalism (Koznova, 2011).
In the history of world literature, the memoirs of Russian emigration occupy a special place. In the 1920s-1960s, the genre of memoirs was particularly distinguished in the literature of Russian emigration.
G.P. Struve writes about the phenomenon of emigrant prose: "The forms of non-fiction are probably the most valuable contribution of foreign writers to the common treasury of Russian literature" (Struve et al., 1996). These words prove the significance of the genre of memories.
After 1917, as a result of the prevailing revolutionary and political situation, many representatives of the Russian intelligentsia were forced to leave Russia and build a "second Russia" beyond its borders. As a result of the great country’s fall, over two million Russian people were outside their homeland and were scattered all over the world. The memoir genre, which does not require long literary preparation from the authors, turned out to be the most attractive for professional writers, as well as for participants and witnesses of certain historical events.
Initially, it was peculiar for this genre to combine two lines – objectively-cognitive and personal-
confessional, which acquired a new character in the memoirs of the first wave of Russian emigration. The authors of the memoirs analyzed the historical situation, gave a personal, sometimes collective assessment of the subjective experiences of participants in historical events in their works. In addition to eyewitness accounts, the aesthetic and literary critical views of the authors and their contemporaries were included in them. Formation of the Kazakh emigration and emigrant literature we also associate with the political and historical events that took place in Kazakhstan after 1917. Until the period of independence acquisition the history of Kazakhstan was considered only in the history of the USSR, which was a consequence of the colonial policy of tsarist Russia, and then the result of the historical and political situation in the Soviet period of our history.
Yu. A. Borev notes in his research notes: "The history of mankind is full of upheavals and cataclysms (especially in the 20th century), which caused huge flows of movements of the masses, migrations and emigrations. So, there were three main waves of emigration from Russia in the 20th century: 1) post- revolutionary – people who did not accept the revolution; 2) postwar – people displaced during the war who are afraid to return to their homeland; 3) post-Soviet – which began as early as the decline of the Soviet period and continued in the perestroika and post-perestroika periods" (Borev).
We can apply this classification to the characteristics of the Kazakh emigration. The beginning of the 20th century was a period full of contradictory changes for the Kazakh steppe. The national liberation uprising of 1916, the February and October revolutions, the creation of the Alash party and the government of Alashord, the Provisional Government, gave impetus to the liberation struggle against tsarism and Russian colonial policy.
In February of 1917, the Provisional Government with its anti-popular policy came to power, streams of White Guardists poured into the Kazakh steppe, which caused great damage to the country’s economy and made changes in the social and political situation of the region. "In 1917, the Kazakhs witnessed two revolutions-the February bourgeois-democratic one and the October Socialist. The first of them gave the possibility of overthrowing the monarchy and Russian tsarism. As a result of the February revolution, there was a dual power in the country, which could not help but affect the situation in Kazakhstan" (Kuzembayuly and Abil, 2010).
We cannot say that the representatives of the national intelligentsia, who came to the political arena at the beginning of the 20th century, had a common opinion on the issues of the state structure. This is natural, because for that period there was no consistent political system for the formation of a free state.
Consequently, there was no common opinion on the issue of "autonomy", its type, nature and content among national figures. Some thought that the "autonomous republic" was a form of self-government state, other representatives of the intelligentsia understood it as a limited power when the right to govern a state is received by a certain group. For example, the leader of the Alash movement A. Bokeykhanov thought: "The Federation is a union of equal states. As part of the federation, each republic has its own state basis, but all the republics are in solidarity. Each of them is independent in matters of governing the country".
Some of the Kazakh intelligentsia believed that the overthrow of the tsarist power and the revolutionary democrats coming to power (primarily the Cadets) would destroy the evil and violence that the Russian state is committing against other nations.
M. Shokay chose a completely different path. During his stay in St. Petersburg, he began to create a self-government plan for the region. The plan was based on the views expressed by members of the Muslim faction. It was planned to create a single Turkestan confederation, which will include national autonomies (Abdullaev et al., 2000). On the basis of the idea of M. Shokay, 150 delegates – Kazakhs, Uzbeks, Tatars, Turkmen, Kirghiz, took part in the first kurultai of Turkestan Muslims on April 16-22, 1917 in Tashkent.
A. Khalid estimated this meeting as "the peak" of the national liberation movement of the peoples of Turkestan (Khalid, 1999). The Central Council of Muslims of the Turkestan Territory (National Center) was elected at the congress as follows: M. Shokay (chairman), A.-Z.Validi (secretary), Mahmudkoja Behbudi, U.Kozhaev, Munauar Kari Abdurashidkhanov, Asadollah Kozhaev, Nasirkhan Tore, S.Lapin, Tashpulat Narbutabekov, Sh.Shagiakhmedov, S.Akaev, A.Orazaev, Abidjan Mahmud, M. Tynyshbaev, Oraz Serdar and others (Shokay, 2012). After the resignation and departure of M. Tynyshbaev to Zhetysu, M. Shokay took the post of prime minister. He briefly headed the government, whose authority at that time extended to Kokand and a small county. The Soviet government presented an ultimatum to the provisional government of the Turkestan (Kokand) autonomy, and then in February 1918 the Red Guard detachments dealt with a small number of autonomy forces. Some leaders of the autonomy were shot, some imprisoned. M. Shokay managed to escape (Kuzembayuly, and Abil, 2010). The departure of M. Tynyshbaev to Zhetysu, the collapse of the Turkestan (Kokand) autonomy, and the forced emigration of M. Shokay led to the dissolution of the right wing of the Alash party. As a result of the fall of the Turkestan government, the Bolsheviks came to power in the province, whose goal was to change the social order and customs of Muslim peoples. As a result, mass emigration began.
"In 1920-1921 about 200 thousand people emigrated from the south of Tajikistan to Afghanistan. Kazakhs were among them. By the end of 1921, 250 thousand people had left Bukhara. Famous, influential people moved to Afghanistan, Iran, India and Turkey. The active members of the Alash movement in Zhetysu – Ybyrayaym Zhainakov, Otynshy Alzhanov, Tolebay Duisebaev and others emigrated to China and there they conducted work to organize an armed uprising against the Bolsheviks".
M. Shokay did not plan to emigrate with other leaders of Turkestan to Afghanistan or another eastern country. In his notes, he writes about his February 1919 visit to Baku, where he arrived to establish ties with the government of Azerbaijan: "Baku is located on the coast of the Caspian Sea, on the opposite shore of Krasnovodsk; so I thought that this place is suitable for the implementation of my life goals and national tasks entrusted to me by my fellow countrymen". But it turned out that, in comparison with Azerbaijan, the social foundations and the political situation in Georgia were more stable. Then he decided to continue his political activities in Georgia. In November 1919, M. Shokay began cooperation with a prominent representative of the North Caucasus, Ahmet Bey Tselikati (Tsalikov). In Tiflis, they published a monthly
magazine "At the Turn", established creative links with the newspaper "Struggle". In 1920, the weekly Yeni Dunya was published (Shokay, 2012).
On February 16, 1921 Soviet troops conquered Georgia. Realizing that Georgia’s independence is
important not only for the Caucasus, but also for other states, M. Shokay publishes the article "Georgia’s grief – grief of all the peoples of Central Asia" in the newspaper "Batumi Life" (Chokaev, 1921). He believes that Freedom and Independence have become symbols of all peoples fighting for Georgia’s national independence.
After the invasion of the Soviet troops in the Caucasus M. Shokay finally determined his political views. He realized that the establishment of Soviet power would lead to a totalitarian, police regime and would not provide any opportunity for a democratic movement. This was one of the reasons why M. Shokay left the country. This conclusion was made on the basis of his conversations, an interview with his brother Nurtaza, his friend V.A. Chaikin and other friends, as well as with the figures of the national liberation movement with whom he met in Baku and Tbilisi. Later in the magazine "Прометей шолуы" (Prometheus sholuy) M. Shokay wrote that there was no possibility for political struggle in Turkestan and Kazakhstan (Tchokay, 1939).
M.Shokay – publicist, editor. The production of a number of newspapers and magazines began on his initiative and with his direct management. Even before the period of emigration, he realized that newspapers and magazines play an important role in the political struggle, so he made every effort to publish and determine the direction of the "Бірлік туы" (Banner of Unity) newspaper. M. Shokay began his work as a journalist-publicist in such publications as "Бірлік туы", "Улуғ Түркістан" (Ulug Türkistan). He is the founder of the journals "Иени Түркістан" (Ieni Türkistan), "Яш Түркістан" (Yash Türkistan), "Түркістан" (Türkistan) and made a lot of efforts for their formation and development. The mentioned magazines were distributed in the Turkic-speaking and Muslim states.
In the above-mentioned editions and other emigrant newspapers and magazines, he published articles
in which he advocated the idea of "United Turkestan", national freedom and struggle for independence. Along with these journalistic articles and speeches at various meetings, the valuable legacy left by M. Shokay is his memories. His work "1917 жыл туралы естеліктерден үзінділер" (Excerpts from memories of 1917) was published in the journal "Yash Türkistan" (from No. 76 for 1936 to No. 90 for 1937). Later (1937), these memories were published in a separate book in Turkish (Shokay, 1917). In 1938, the book was translated into French and printed in the magazine "Prometheus sholuy" (La Revue de Promethee) (Tchokay, 1938).
In 1988, Professor Saadet Iskhakikyzy Shagatay in Ankara reissued the book along with a preface on
the basis of the first version of the book, published in Turkish (Esmagambetov, 2008). M. Shokay speaks of the main goal of writing memoirs: "The main task of memoirs was to show what difficulties Turkestani had to endure at that time. We can achieve the independence of Turkestan, if we remember these difficulties, take into account the experience of those years in our struggle" (Takenov et al., 1997). For that time, M. Shokay’s memories were important because the author shared his experience in them, told about the difficulties that they had to endure. And today they have important historical significance as documentary sources: reading the records of M. Shokay, one can understand and explain many events of the beginning of the 20th century.
For example, "A complex situation, especially dangerous for the national interests of Turkestan, has developed in Tashkent. There, two groups of "Shura-i Islamiya" and "Ulema Zhamiyati" waged an irreconcilable struggle between themselves. Although they were not regional organizations, they still
influenced the population of Turkestan. "Shura-i Islamiya", led by Munauuar Kari, considering the existing conditions, called for reforms.
"Ulema Zhamiyati", whose leader was Serali Lapin, approached the problem in a different way" (Takenov, 1997). This excerpt from M. Shokay’s memories can be compared with a fragment that illuminates the same events in the five-volume collective work "Қазақстан тарихы. Көне заманнан бүгінге дейін" (History of Kazakhstan. From ancient times to the present). "At the Tashkent Council, consisting entirely of Europeans, as well as workers and soldiers who do not consider the way of life of the local (Muslim) population, two political parties were formed to protect the interests of the local population. One of them was created by the Jadids, the forces of the national democratic movement, and was named "Shura Islami" (Islamic Council).
"...The second party, which called itself "Shura-ulema" (Council of religious association), consisted of Muslims who left the Shura Islami party. It was headed by Serali Lapin. It was a small party that failed to exert a proper influence on the life of the population of southern Kazakhstan" (Kuzembayuly and Abil, 2010). This example describes the situation that has developed in Turkestan after the February revolution of 1917.
It can be noted that the information contained in M. Shokay’s memoirs and in the "History of Kazakhstan" (4th volume) about the events of the beginning of the 20th century in Kazakhstan, as a whole, do not contradict each other, although there are minor differences. M.Shokay writes that these organizations "did not receive the name of regional organizations", and in the second work he says: "two political parties were formed", i.e. their activity is assessed as the activity of political parties. In the memoirs of M. Shokay, the organization, which was headed by S. Lapin, is called "Ulema zhamiyati". Modern historians call it "Shura-ulema".
Returning from Petrograd to Turkestan in April 1917, M. Shokay took an active part in the work of Shura-Islami, because this organization supported the policy of the provisional government on the development of Turkestan by democratic means; it also fought for the rights of the local population. The goals and objectives of the organization corresponded to the ideas of M. Shokay. A feature of the genre of memories is their autobiographical nature. The author of the memoirs writes about the events he witnessed himself, connects these events with his life and comes to definite conclusions. Leading the narrative from the first-person perspective, he assesses the events or the political situation, expresses his attitude towards the society in which he lives. And this, in turn, is connected with life experience and understanding of the world.
In memoirs, as we have already noted, biographical character prevails. Hence, in comparison with other genres in them, the connection between personality and time is more clearly traced, which, in turn, emphasizes their documentary nature. Getting acquainted with the memories of M. Shokay, it can be noted that the information contained in them, corresponds to the life truth as much as possible. As we have already noted above, memories are of a biographical nature. But they are not limited only to information about the personal life of the author. In the case when the author of the memoirs is an active participant in significant political and social events, memories acquire special historical significance. The main value of M. Shokay’s memories is precisely this. Not only he talks about the events in which he took an active part, but also explains the causes and consequences of these events. For example: "We believed and hoped that the 1917 revolution would give us an opportunity to build a national state. But we realized that our hopes will not be justified. Of course, we must not forget about our participation in the 1917 uprising. We must keep these events in mind, since we will remember our mistakes, which will help to avoid them in the future" (Takenov
et al., 1997). These words sound like advice to future generations. This is also one of the characteristic features of the genre of memories.
In the memories thoughts, reflections, the views of the older generation about the time, the society in
which they lived, about people who made a significant contribution to the history of the people, are passed on to succeeding generations. Hence, the main task of the genre of memories is to convey the life truth to the readers; documentation, authenticity are the more important features here, not artistic merit. Secondly, analysis and evaluation, which the person formed, tempered in the political struggle, gives to those or other events, facts is important for history. Here is what Shokay writes in his memoirs about the situation in Kazakhstan during the February 1917 revolution and the way the representatives of the Kazakh intelligentsia reacted to it: "The situation in Petrograd had an impact on the situation in different regions, including in Kazakhstan, where the unrest began. On one hand, these were the actions of bourgeois elements, on the other hand, revolutionary-democratic forces began their activity. Correspondingly, local executive (civil) committees of the Provisional Government and organs of revolutionary power-Soviets began to be organized.
Just like in the center, there were facts when the executive committees included members of the Soviets and vice versa, the Soviets included members of the executive committee. According to Lenin, "reconciliation of the two dictatorships had its own reasons, but they led to an aggravation of the situation, because the views of politicians and the people on the question of the future development of Kazakhstan turned out to be far from each other" (Kuzembayuly and Abil, 2010). "Akmechet is the city in which I grew up and first went to school. I was familiar with the Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Tatars, Russians and Jews. And all the inhabitants of the city knew me well. According to the customs of our people, the respected people’s children were also treated with respect, they were considered their defenders and legal representatives. People treated me with respect and reverence.
I studied in Petersburg. As a student, I visited Akmechet several times, collected materials related to the migration activities of the government ... established a connection between Tashkent and St. Petersburg together with other representatives of the Kazakh people. I managed to protect the lands and water of the local population, who fell victim to the cunning policy of the Russian government, from seizing by aliens several times. Knowing this, the residents of Akmechet chose me as their representative for the first kurultai of the executive committees of Turkestan (Takenov et al., 1997). Let us compare this excerpt from M. Shokay's memoirs with the materials of historical documents. Spouse of M. Shokay, Maria Yakovlevna, states: "Mustafa went to school in Perovsk since he was seven years of age" (Shokay, 1999). And the document, stored in the archives of Uzbekistan, says: "In 1899-1902 he studied at the school of the city of Perovsk". K. Esmaganbetov writes: "During the years of his studies in Tashkent, Mustafa repeatedly addressed the complaints of his fellow countrymen to Governor-General A. Samsonov. In them, the local population spoke of the oppression that Russian settlers exerted, especially on land and water issues" (Esmagambetov, 2008).
The authors came to the conclusion that the information described in M. Shokay’s memoirs corresponds to the facts set forth in the biographical documents. We see that the political views of M. Shokay began to form already from a young age and were directed to serve his homeland, his people. As the author himself recalls, the residents of Akmechet chose him as a delegate for the first kurultai of the executive committees of Turkestan. This information is of great importance for scientists who study the life, work, heritage of the prominent public and political figure M. Shokay. In the memoirs of M. Shokay, the events of 1917 are described. This information is a valuable documentary source for scientists involved in the study of national
history. As evidence of this statement, we can note the fact that when creating a five-volume work on the history of Kazakhstan, published in 2010, a lot of information about the history of Kazakhstan at the beginning of the 20th century is taken from the memoirs of M. Shokay.
So, let us note that the popularity of the genre of memories in the literary process is explained by its documentary nature. They are of interest not only for scientists: works written in the genre of memories are read by everyone who is interested in the history of their homeland, their people; they describe the life and work of many individuals who have left their mark on history. In the memoirs, not only historical information is given, but also the author’s opinion about the time, the society in which they lived and worked, their attitude to the political and social situation of that epoch are expressed. Consequently, the genre of memoirs is an object of study not only of literary criticism, but also of history, political science, sociology, psychology and other branches of science.
Abdullaev, R.M., Agzamkhodzhaev, S., Aliev, I.A. (2000). Turkestan in the early twentieth century: the history of the sources of national independence. Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Tashkent.
Akysh, N. (2010): Kazakh memoir novel. Arna, Almaty.
Bekmakhanov, E. (1994). Kazakhstan in the 20-40 years of the ХІХ century. Sanat, Almaty.
Borev, Yu.B. Emigration and literature. Retrieved July 8, 2018 from http://www.independent- academy.net/science/library/borev_emigrazija.html
Chokaev, M. (1921). The struggle for Georgia's independence and Muslims. Batumi life, Moscow. Esmagambetov, K. (2008). A world recognized person. Dyke Press, Almaty.
Khalid, A. (1999). The Politics of Muslim Cultural Reform. Oxford, Los Angeles.
Koznova, N.N. (2011). Memoirs of Russian emigrant writers of the first wave: the concept of history and typology of the narrative forum. Moscow State Regional University, Moscow.
Kunaqova, R. (1998). Literary studies. Dictionary. Ana tіlі, Almaty. Kuzembayuly, A., Abil, E. (2010): History of Kazakhstan. Atamura, Almaty. Marx, K., Engels, F. (1957). About art. 2-volume. Iskusstvo, Moscow.
Pavlovskaya, S.V. (2006). Memoirs and diaries of Russian historians as a historical source of studying the socio-political and scientific-pedagogical life of Russia at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries. Nizhny Novgorod State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Nizhny Novgorod.
Shokay, M. (1917). 1917 Aid Hedirah Valiyari, Kazakh. 251: pp. 12-14. Shokay, M. (1999). Selected. Dyke-press, Almaty.
Shokay, M. (2012). Complete collection of works by M. Shokay. DykePress, Almaty.
Struve, G.P., Vildanova, R.I., Kudryavtsev, V.B., Lappo-Danilevsky, K.Yu. (1996). Russian literature in exile.
Russkiy put', Paris-Moscow.
Takenov, A., Koigeldiev, M., Shokay, M., Shokay, M. (1997). Memoirs. Turk dunyasi arastirmalari vakfi.
Aksaray, Istanbul.
Tchokay, M. (1938). Le Turkestan on 1917 (Pages de souvenirs), La Revue de Pzome’the. 1(2): pp. 179- 188
Tchokay, M. (1939). Souvenirs incitant a I`action, La Revue de Promethee. 3 (7): рр. 9-10