The paper analyzes the correlation of factors that influenced the formation of Krymsky's scientific ideas about the Arab East; raises the question of the meaning of sensory perception of a scientific object and the specifics of the functioning of an ethnic stereotype in scientific research; suggests a model of scientific knowledge in the field of Oriental studies and considers its implementation in relation to A. E. Krymsky.

Keywords: A. E. Krymsky, Arab East, scientific cognition, scientific object, ethnic stereotype, emotional perception, communicative experience, scientific communication.

The uniqueness of the scientific method of Agafangel Efimovich Krymsky (1871-1942) and the originality of his Oriental studies make us once again turn to his experience in the field of Oriental studies. A. E. Krymsky's perception of the Arab world, the formation and development of his scientific ideas about the Arab East found their rich reflection in the scientific heritage of the scientist. Krymsky's letters, most of which are published in Russia and Ukraine, are particularly valuable in this regard [Epistolarna spadschina..., 2006; Krymsky, 1975; Smilyanskaya, 1997, 1993].

Krymsky, as is well known, did not keep diaries; he reflected his direct observations and experiences in letters, which, according to his own confessions, he took very seriously. In addition to business information, the letters often contain lengthy arguments of the scientist on various pressing issues. In addition, Krymsky, in correspondence with people close to him, frankly shared his impressions and personal experiences. The nature of letters is often such that even in one paragraph, a sharp emotional reaction to an event can be combined with a discussion of cases in a scientific institution or a message about inaccuracies in a scientific work. However, all statements of the scientist regarding current affairs, whether it is a discussion of scientific problems, continuation of a literary discussion or organizational issues, are distinguished by completeness, clarity and extreme tact. The pronounced subjective nature of the correspondence, the frequent mixing of plots laced with emotional assessments, apparently did not bother Krymsky's addressees, who were well acquainted with his impulsive nature. The emotional, somewhat biased style, which is characteristic to a certain extent even of the scientist's scientific works, helps to feel the immediacy of Krymsky's perception of his scientific object.

The Russian historian-orientalist I. M. Smilyanskaya, who studied in detail the scientific heritage of A. E. Krymsky and prepared several publications of his works, writes in the preface to the publication of letters of the scientist from Lebanon to his relatives:: "The struggle between two approaches to the perception of the world - scientific and artistic-took place in the work of A. E. Krymsky during, perhaps, his entire life... In the scientific works of A. E. Krymsky, one can observe the presence of imaginative thinking, characteristic of him as a writer " [Smilyanskaya, 1975, p. 305]. Based on the material of Krymsky po's correspondence-

page 112
We try to identify the peculiarities of his perception of the Arab world, the evolution of his scientific ideas, and the correlation of the sensory and rational spheres in this process.

In the abstract, the development of scientific ideas of a novice country scientist is inextricably linked with the ethnic stereotype (ES) that exists in the society of which the scientist is a member. In the case of Krymsky, obviously, we should distinguish between two lines of stereotypical perception of the Arab superethnos, corresponding to two cultural complexes in which the scientist's personality was formed - relatively speaking, "Ukrainian" and "Moscow". Krymsky was not a Ukrainian by blood, but all his childhood and youth were spent in a Ukrainian environment. At the same time, not the highest social position of his family may have helped the future scientist to deeply understand and love Ukrainian folk culture. Then, already in Moscow, as a student of the Lazarev Institute of Oriental Languages, Krymsky was in a completely different environment, absorbing the spirit of European scholarship, but at the same time a set of spontaneous ideas about Eastern peoples characteristic of the European academic environment of that time.

Both of these cultural complexes are very close to each other and are essentially European-Christian in terms of civilization. In this sense, Krymsky, as an aspiring scientist, was a bearer of stereotypical ideas peculiar to this civilization. However, both the "Ukrainian" and "Moscow" components had their own peculiarities, introducing a certain originality into the stereotypical ideas of Krymsky about Arabs at the beginning of his scientific activity.

The novice researcher's view of the Muslim Arab culture as "different" and alien was quite consistent with the ideas that were generally common to Europeans (including scientists) of the 19th century. However, for Krymsky, this view was somewhat balanced by the memory of his Crimean Muslim ancestors preserved in the family.

In the further development of ideas about the Arab nation, his "Ukrainian" worldview probably allowed him to draw a parallel between the revival in the second half of the XIX century of Ukrainian culture and Ukrainian national identity in the conditions of the Russian Empire and similar processes in Arab society within the Ottoman Empire, which began after a long stagnation in the same XIX century. Krymsky's creative work and strong contacts with prominent figures of the Ukrainian national movement, on the one hand, and increased attention to the development of Arabic literature, education and ideological trends in the Arab East during the so - called Nahda, or Arab Renaissance, on the other hand, speak in favor of such parallelism in Krymsky.

The "Moscow" aspect of the stereotypical perception of the Crimean Arab culture was close to the idealization of ideas about the contemporary Arab society under the influence of studying the rich heritage of medieval Arab science and culture. In this aspect, the scientist was just as far from an objective view of the Arabs as in the popular perception of the Arabs as carriers of an unambiguously alien, mainly Muslim culture, and, moreover, according to the majority at that time, it was at a lower level of social development.

As you learn Arabic in multiple ways (super)The Crimean ethnic group gradually overcomes the ES, its research approach becomes more objective and unbiased. This, however, does not lead to the loss of sharpness of emotional perception of reality and even a scientific object, which is generally inherent in Krymsky's personality. The emotional component will find a fruitful outlet in his literary work, it will even largely influence the style of presentation in some of his historical works, but in no case will it interfere with the formation of a scientist's NP. That is, Krymsky's bright and impressionable personality, although it left its mark on various aspects of his scientific work, did not affect the objectivity of his scientific conclusions and ideas at all. Analysis of the available material shows that the process of forming Krymsky's scientific ideas about the Arab world can be very schematically depicted as follows (see Fig. 1):

page 113

Figure 1

Being at the initial stage under the strong influence of the ethnic stereotype (ES), the researcher's scientific ideas (NP) in direct socio-cultural contacts and everyday communication undergo changes under the influence of both the received communicative experience (which itself changes its character depending on changes in the socio-cultural and political situation) and the counter-ethnic stereotype (in the case of the Crimean one - Syrians and Lebanese perceptions of Russia and Russians). At the same time, at first, such an impact makes you appeal to the ES more often than before, and look for matches of new information to the stereotype. With the development of ideas, the latter is overcome and a dynamic interaction of scientific ideas with three main factors is established: scientific research itself, scientific communication, and the continuation of communicative experience.

Of course, such a model mainly reflects the process of the formation of scientific ideas, only indicating the mechanism for further development and deepening of scientific ideas and knowledge about the object, since the latter is too specific for each individual scientist and is difficult to generalize.

Along the way, it should be noted that the development of ideas about a different people in the historical perspective and in the consciousness of the whole people (for example, the change in the perception of Arabs by Russians over several centuries) to a certain extent resembles the development of ideas in an individual (scientist) during his life. This, however, is a special topic for broad scientific analysis.

The peculiarity of Krymsky's implementation of the described model was that it was accompanied by an emotional component of the perception of a scientific object. A. E. Krymsky, in his letters to I. Y. Krachkovsky, admitted that it was impossible for himself to study subjects that were far from his spiritual interests [Smilyanskaya, 1975, p. 305]. The same impression is received by the reader of other letters and notes of the scientist, where he reports that he cannot but combine his scientific research with poetic creativity, inspired by rich impressions and personal experiences as a result of direct communication with the inhabitants of Beirut or Mountain Lebanon around him [Krimsky, 1973, p.618].

Attentive attitude to their own emotional experiences, increased attention to the national theme, the desire to capture the elusive feeling, the mood of the modern scientist of the Syrian-Lebanese society, give a unique coloring to both creative and scientific activities of the Crimean, leave an imprint on his scientific style and language.

Thus, if we apply the proposed scheme in relation to A. E. Krymsky, we should add an element of "emotional reflection" for each of the stages, i.e. an analysis of one's own experiences in relation to a scientific object, which continued even in the later period of the scientist's activity.

To justify the above theses, we should first of all refer to the statements of Krymsky himself, to his letters. Let's analyze the available material in the context of the proposed model.

page 114
Usually, ideas about another nation are formed long before meeting with individual representatives of this people. The corresponding ES forms a psychological attitude to the emotional perception of another people, sets the appropriate algorithm for selecting and interpreting the facts of interaction [Repina, 2008, p. 5]. Further, during direct contacts, a personal attitude to this people is formed in the process of combining archetypal representations with impressions of everyday life. Then, when studying certain aspects of the life of this people, the reverse process occurs, but already at a new stage: the impressions of meeting the "other" are supplemented and developed by information obtained both as a result of direct study of the object, and from other observers - from written sources and from specific people. In other words, in the process of developing scientific ideas about a different people, it is inevitable that the emotional sphere of the scientist should come into contact with the ES, that the theoretical knowledge obtained should be viewed through the prism of the ES, and then through direct impressions. In this sense, the comparison of this process with "surprise" in the epistemological sense is quite successful: "The surprise and misunderstanding of the historian when meeting the "other", when articulated, becomes the first step to understanding" (Bynum, 1997, 2001).

Many researchers note an internal contradiction and duality in the existence of ES. Often, on the one hand, there is a negative image of a representative of another nation (for example: swindlers, robbers, semi-savages, barbarians, etc.), caused by a lack of understanding of many aspects in a different culture, language, and customs. On the other hand, in relation to the same people, certain positive traits can be idealized, as a result of which another side of the idea of the people develops - extremely positive, even romantic (noble, hospitable, brave, people of a broad soul, etc.) [Murtuzaliev, 2004, p. 279]. The obvious internal contradiction of this perception is sometimes not removed for centuries.

As a researcher-practitioner, the scientist is inevitably exposed to the described stereotypes of perception of the other at first. Krymsky's impressions of a direct encounter with the East, as can be seen from the letters of the "Syrian" period of the young scientist's activity (especially the first year of his stay in Syria), were clearly influenced by the stable multidimensional stereotype of perception of Middle Eastern Arabs with its internal contradiction.

A. E. Krymsky, following many Russian travelers, initially solved this contradiction for himself by grouping the entire Lebanese population in two opposite images: he gave the inhabitants of Mountain Lebanon exclusively positive features, largely idealizing their image, and the inhabitants of Beirut, in turn, reported a negative image. Not only in his letters to his family, but also in correspondence with his fellow Orientalists, Krymsky allows himself very emotional expressions in the characteristics of Lebanese people. So, in a letter to his father half a month after arriving in Beirut, he wrote: "The people here in the mass are unbearably roguish. I am being deceived from all sides" [Krymsky, 1975, p. 33]. As time passed, he wrote to V. F. Miller: "The Lebanese Highlanders are the most beautiful people in the world: of course, they are rude, like all peasants, but they have straightforwardness, honesty, and lack of hypocrisy - you can forget that Lebanon is the East. In Beirut, I once again found myself in the circle of false, flattering, hypocritical people. My happiness is that Attai's parents are an exception: only with them you can take your soul away" [Krimsky, 1973, p. 292]. More than two months later, the scientist wrote: "The more I learn about the Beyrutins, the more disgusting they are, and the contrast with Russia is very sharp. Especially this year, they are unsympathetic, because now everyone knows about my excellent relations with the consul, and various scammers do not stop applying to me with petitions " [Krimsky, 1973, pp. 307-308]. It is interesting that the last two statements can not be considered the first "direct" reaction to unfamiliar phenomena in a different culture or irritation at the first meeting with features that are alien to a Russian scientist

стр. 115
in the national character of a foreign people: both letters were written in the second year of Krymsky's stay in Lebanon.

The letters even contain such a curious contrast, characteristic, of course, exclusively for an Oriental scholar, when the image of an Arab formed under the influence of reading classical Arabic texts comes into conflict with the perception of a contemporary Arab. As might be expected, the image of the latter does not compare with the idealized idea of medieval Arabs: "As much as I like the ancient literature of the Arabs, so dislike the current Arabs. I've probably had a lot of conversations lately with Christian mountaineers and others who've managed to reconcile me to the modern Arabs, but the townspeople are something terrible. A distinctive feature is duplicity and hypocrisy that reaches monstrous proportions "[Krimsky, 1973, p. 262]... "they have an enviable quality: fanaticism, which is no less developed among Christians than among Muslims" [ibid., p. 306].

In his letters to his relatives, A. E. Krymsky describes in detail the everyday difficulties that he encountered in Lebanon at first, and is indignant at the lack of elements of everyday life among Arabs that seem natural to a European. The unusual nature of Arab cuisine, the peculiarities of the climate, coupled with the traditional way of life of Syrians unusual for a European, led to an aggravation of diseases and all sorts of ailments. To these problems were added the difficulties with the language that Krymsky experienced at first, when faced in practice with the Lebanese and Beirut (Syriac) dialects of Arabic, which he, an expert in the Koranic classical language, did not know. The described "lower" - everyday - level of acquaintance with a different culture was, without exaggeration, a stress for the scientist.

However, even during his Middle East business trip, Krymsky clearly began to overcome that stage of" surprise " and dependence on ES. Vivid impressions began to fade, irritation from unusual and sometimes harmful living conditions began to give way to habit. In a letter to V. F. Miller dated July 15, 1897, Krymsky wrote: "Today I have completed 8 months of my stay in Syria. But it seems to me that I have already been here for 8 years and the fresh impressions of my stay here, which I wrote to you about, now seem to me to be somehow remote, long-lived. Syria has ceased to amaze me, and I have become quite familiar with it" [Krimsky, 1973, p. 283]. It can be assumed that already during their stay in the East, there was a gradual transition, an ascent to the next stage of Crimean perception of a different culture and a different people.

Without ceasing to record all the new facts from the life around him, his experiences and emotions, Krymsky in his letters does not seem to share his impressions with his addressees, but rather records observations. The emotional and somewhat biased style, which is characteristic to a certain extent even of a scientist's scientific works, contributes to the accuracy of transmitting direct impressions.

The scientist did not seek a comprehensive analysis of the current political and social situation, As I. M. Smilyanskaya writes, "public events that did not directly concern the narrow sphere of life, the interests of the Christian population of Beirut, partly passed by the Crimean one" [Smilyanskaya, 1975, p.17]. He shunned all sorts of intrigues and even close relations with the Russian consulate, which in theory could be very useful to him. This is also indicated by his statement at the end of this cooperation (as a result of the replacement of Consul General A. A. Gagarin with K. N. Lishin). "I feel extremely satisfied, because no one is asking me to ask for a reward with money or an order for his Orthodoxy or a lucrative position, to explain to the consulate the intrigues of the dragoman, to pass a complaint against the metropolitan deacon (who holds the metropolitan himself in his hands), to get the selection of a deputy to the Lebanese parliament chosen at the

page 116
help of Maronite gendarmes among the Orthodox population " [Krimsky, 1973, p. 310].

Only what actually related to historical or philological science interested Krymsky and forced him, sometimes even risking his life, to seek direct communication with the local population. So, in the fourth month of his stay in Beirut, he wrote to V. F. Miller: "After the first expressions of amazement that I am not afraid to wander in this quarter [Mazraa], where Christians are always slaughtered, the peasants very simply and frankly began to chat, and these conversations remain the most pleasant impressions for me from the inhabitants of Syria. To a certain extent, this is also useful for ethnography: I write down a lot of things. I especially manage to hear a lot of proverbs: the local residents pour them into their speech, and today I have 122 proverbs, so in two years there will be a whole book " [Krimsky, 1973, p. 268].

Interestingly, according to some of Krymsky's statements, it can be concluded that in general, the current linguistic and socio-political situation in Syria concerned him only insofar as it could contribute to a deeper understanding of the deeper layers of Arabic philology and history, respectively. "Here in Syria, I study exclusively Arabic: I study the vernacular language in order to consciously relate to the literary language; I study the vocabulary of the old Arabic language, which is an ocean; I study the grammar of the literary language in its subtleties and controversial issues; I read those works of Arabic literature that I have not yet read (and this is also an ocean); I learn to parse manuscripts" [Krimsky, 1973, p. 291].

The qualities of A. E. Krymsky as an objective researcher were reflected not only in the actual Oriental studies of the scientist, but also in his correspondence. Krymsky, being " fervently devoted to the search for truth... he tries to be as objective and truthful as possible, not to lose a single grain of the truth that he has grasped with his soul" [cit. by: Smilyanskaya, 1975, p. 305]. He did not seek to soften his immediate perception of Arab culture, but carefully recorded his impressions in letters that he repeatedly asked his addressees to keep. These notes helped the scientist to create numerous articles, historical works, and, especially, literary works that are distinguished by their documentary nature. It is quite obvious that Krymsky objectified his experience of direct emotional perception of Lebanese reality - he considered it as a valuable object of scientific cultural and historical knowledge. Thus, the everyday level of perception of the "other" was important for the scientist as a component of his Oriental studies.

The way Krymsky's view of the Arab East changed during the development of the non-profit organization, we can also see the successive stages of perception of this object. In connection with the perception of the Other, researcher of cross-cultural interactions L. P. Repina describes the structure of the "friends-strangers" opposition as follows: "In everyday life, it arises on the basis of communicative criteria that imply the possibility of establishing communication (language, appearance, clothing, behavior) and perception of external forms of another culture. But deeper contacts directly affect the worldview inherent in each culture, cultural values, and ideological attitudes" [Repina, 2008, p. 10]. Although the scheme proposed above includes only three main stages in the development of scientific ideas, it is possible that a detailed study of the issue will allow us to identify them in more detail and definitively.

Describing the features of the communicative situation (stage 2 in the diagram), we should briefly focus on such an important factor in the formation of an idea as the influence of a counter ethnic stereotype. Krymsky's sparse comments suggest that he reacted vividly to the perception of the Lebanese and Beirut Orthodox, among whom he spent most of his time, of both the Russians themselves and Russia's policy in the Middle East. This perception (counter-perception) was certainly rooted in the opinion of Arab Orthodox Christians that had been established for centuries

page 117
about the Russian state as the patroness, and about the Russians - as carriers of true Orthodox spirituality (more strict than Greek or Arabic).

This ES-counter-extended to Krymsky, who, apparently, was not distinguished by religious zeal. We can assume that he was annoyed by the prejudice of the Arabs around him, the unapproachable perception of him as a true believer and a great prayer book just because he was Russian. "I don't go to church, and it makes a sensation," Krymsky wrote to his brother at the very beginning of his business trip. "My hostess made me cross myself in front of her to make sure I was a Christian" [Krymsky, 1975, p. 41], and then he described the episode with an Arab girl passing by the window, who suddenly called him a Jew. This discrepancy between expectations caused by the stereotype of Russian perception and reality sometimes caused Arab disillusionment with Krymsky's identity as a representative of Russia, as a "Moskobi".

The same applies to extrapolating the identity of an outsider from prejudices about the State to which it belongs. In a letter to V. F. Miller dated July 15, 1897, the scientist wrote:: "The mood of minds in Syria has changed a lot recently. When I arrived, my love for Russia was still alive, although even then there was confusion about its behavior " [Krimsky, 1973, p. 283].

Other letters of the scientist show how the sentiments mentioned in the letter affected the mutual perceptions of the Crimean and his Arab environment. For example, he described how a certain priest who founded an Orthodox educational institution demanded "that the consul collect a hundred gold pieces among the rich people of Beirut to support his school: the consul should do this, because' Russia is Orthodox and the school is also Orthodox '" [Krimsky, 1973, p. 293]. In a letter to his sister, Krymsky noted that "the Lebanese Orthodox have an idea that they are actually subjects of Russia" (Krymsky, 1975, p.192).

Such sentiments, as is clear from Krymsky's emotional statements, also affected the attitude of Syrians and Lebanese towards him personally as a kind of intermediary. So, in a letter in another of his letters from 1897, the scientist describes the following curious case:: "The priest Fr. Hanna came to me and asked me to write a letter to the priest. Gagarin: to praise the school, yesterday's performance and ask for an order for him (the priest). This surprised me greatly, but I wrote to the prince. The priest says that the goal of his school (the only Orthodox one in the entire district) is to discourage students from Protestants and Catholics and educate them in the spirit of Orthodoxy " [Krymsky, 1975, p. 159].

Krymsky's letters reflect in general terms the mechanism proposed above for the formation of scientific ideas about a different people. It should be noted that both the first part of the proposed model - the influence of direct impressions on the theoretical ideas of a scientist, and the last part-the further adjustment of scientific ideas through the continuation of communicative experience and scientific contacts, were implemented in the process of developing the idea of A. E. Krymsky about the Arab East. While still in Syria, he himself notes the transition to another qualitatively new level of Oriental analysis: "Looking back now at what I did in the East, I am pleased to note a large increase in my knowledge... The knowledge that I have used everything I could here is very comforting. My "Essay on the Development of Sufism", published in the Oriental Antiquities, now seems to me so pathetic! I would very willingly destroy it and write a new one based on the sources that I now have" [Krimsky, 1973, p.306]. And some time after his return from Syria in his letters to V. F. To Miller, Krymsky seriously discusses the possibility of his repeated short trip (to clarify his materials on the Syriac dialect of Arabic, etc.) [Krymsky, 1973, p. 337]. Unfortunately, the second business trip to the East did not take place, and Krymsky focused on theoretical research in the field of Arabic history and philology.-

page 118
in which he always tried to use the information he received in "field" research in Syria and Mountainous Lebanon.

Subsequently, Krymsky refreshed and supplemented his impressions of the East in conversations with I. Y. Krachkovsky, the Gagarin family, and others who had been in the Arab countries for a long time. [Кримський, 1973, с. 419].

It is obvious that the process of formation of a scientist's scientific ideas about the Arab East was accompanied by contact with his own emotional perception of the scientific object at all stages of scientific work. However, it was Krymsky's deep interest in the study of the East, great erudition and strict scientific self-discipline and dedication that became the key to the success of his numerous scientific works.

Krymsky's academic activities were often conducted in spite of external circumstances that made this activity seemingly impossible. The severity of the situation that had developed by the beginning of the 1930s was so great that Krymsky's scientific contacts during these years became increasingly rare. Circumstances led to the fact that the scientist's life began a period of forced scientific seclusion, which ended only in 1940, when Krymsky's forces were already running out.

When reading Krymsky's correspondence, one gets the impression that in the last period of the scientist's work, only research in the field of Oriental studies gave him true satisfaction and fueled his fading strength. "I'm working on" Novoar. "with great pleasure and enthusiasm," Krymsky wrote to I. Y. Krachkovsky in April 1937, " and a pleasant mood does not stop at heart. The work is proceeding productively... I work from morning till late at night, forgetting about rest" [Perepiskaia..., 1997, p. 266]. As he himself admitted, in the 1930s it was from studying the history of the East that A. E. Krymsky drew his vitality, and about the time of his stay in Syria and Lebanon he said that these were " ... two years, two of the best years of my life... "[Letters of A. E. Krymsky..., 1993, p. 153].

Perhaps this statement may seem to contradict what Krymsky wrote in his letters from Lebanon in 1896-1898 - about how much irritated him and caused confusion among Syrians and Lebanese. However, it seems that there is no contradiction here, and precisely because Krymsky's first-hand impressions and the enormous amount of information he gathered in the Middle East were most valuable to him. Apparently, the best time for the scientist was precisely in terms of the richness of the material for research: direct observation of the spoken Arabic language, customs, customs and culture of contemporary Arabs, political realities in the Middle East, a lot of books for the Lazarev Institute purchased in Syria, as well as an invaluable collection of Arabic manuscripts that he managed to collect and bring to Moscow. The impressions and emotions caused by a close acquaintance with the Arab East became for the researcher part of the baggage that needed scientific analysis and creative refraction upon arrival at home, which was implemented by the scientist in his scientific work.

Returning to our proposed model, we note that during the period of Krymsky's scientific maturity, the development of his scientific ideas was influenced both by the experience gained during his stay in the East and by constant fruitful scientific contacts with his Kiev, Moscow and Leningrad colleagues-orientalists. In other words, the theoretical understanding of Oriental problems was fueled, on the one hand, by the Syrian experience of direct contact with the scientific object, and on the other - by the experience of scientific communication obtained throughout life, but this understanding was constantly accompanied by a deep emotional perception of the object of research - Arabic history, culture and language. Krymsky's vivid work in Oriental studies and scientific creativity is a brilliant confirmation of the fruitfulness of such a synthesis.

page 119
list of literature

Verkalets M. N. The problem of spirituality of the Turkic peoples in the research of A. E. Krymsky. Kiev, 1994.

Vernadsky V. I. Diaries of 1917-1921 Киев: Наукова Думка, 1994 - 1997.

Vernadsky V. I. Diaries of 1926-1934 / Ed. by V. P. Volkov, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 2001.

Vernadsky V. I. Diaries of 1935-1941 / Ed. by V. P. Volkov, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 2006.

Gurnitsky K. I. Agafangel Efimovich Krymsky / Ed. by I. M. Smilyanskaya, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1980.

Kirilyuk S. Creative personality in the poetry and prose of Agatangel Krymsky (psychoanalytic aspect) / / Studia Philologia, 2008, N 1.

Krachkovsky I. Y. Ocherki po istorii russkoi arabistiki [Essays on the History of Russian Arabic Studies].
Krymskiy A. E. Istoriya novoi arabyskoi literatury (XIX - nachalo XX V.) [History of New Arabic Literature (XIX-early XX century)].
Krymsky A. E. Letters from Lebanon 1896-1898. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1975.
Matveeva L. V., Tsygankova E. G. All-Ukrainian Academy of Sciences: The Year 1929 / / In Memoriam. Istoricheskiy sbornik pamyati F. F. Perchenko [Historical collection in memory of F. F. Perchenko]. Moscow; SPb., 1995.

Murtuzaliev S. I. "Friends" and" strangers " in the Caucasus-history and modernity // Stavropol Almanac of the Russian Society of Intellectual History. Issue No. 6. Stavropol, 2004.

Correspondence of academicians A. E. Krymsky and I. Yu. Krachkovsky of the 1920s-1930s / Published by I. M. Smilyanskaya / / Unknown Pages of Domestic Oriental Studies / Ed. by V. V. Naumkin. Russian Academy of Sciences, 1997.

Letters of A. E. Krymsky to I. Y. Krachkovsky / Published and edited by A. G. Nedvetsky and I. M. Smilyanskaya // East (Oriens). 1993. N 1.

Repina L. P. Intercultural dialogue in the historical context. Report at the meeting of the Central Institute of Information Technology of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow, April 2008).

Rosov V. A. V. I. Vernadsky and Russian Orientalists. St. Petersburg, 1993.

Smilyanskaya I. M. Agafangel Efimovich Krymsky: (To the 100th anniversary of his birth) / / Peoples of Asia and Africa. 1971. N4.

Smilyanskaya I. M. Ocherk vostokovednoi deyatel'nosti A. E. Krymskogo [Essay on the Oriental studies activity of A. E. Krymsky].

Smilyanskaya I. M. Preface to the publication: Correspondence of academicians A. E. Krymsky and I. Y. Krachkovsky in the 1920s-1930s / / Unknown Pages of Russian Oriental Studies, Moscow, 1997.

Smilyanskaya I. M. Preface to the publication: Letters of A. E. Krymsky to I. Y. Krachkovsky // East (Oriens). 1993. N 1.

Krymskiy A. E. Istoriya novaya arabyskoi literatury (XIX - nachalo XX V.) [History of New Arabic Literature (XIX-early XX century)].
Chernikov I. F. On A. E. Krymsky's research in Turkology (1920s) // East (Oriens). 1992. N4.

Веркалець М. М. А. Ю. Кримський у колі своїх сучасників. Київ, 1990.

Епістолярна спадщина А. Кримського (1890 - 1941). Т. II (1918 - 1941) / Гол. ред. Л. В. Матвєєва / Ін-т сходознавства ім. А. Ю. Кримського НАН України. Київ: Стилос, 2006.

Кримьский А. Ю. Вибрані сходознавчі праці. В 5 т. / Ін-т сходознавства ім. А. Ю. Кримського НАН України. Київ, 2007.

Кримський А. Ю. Твори. Т. 5, ч. 1: Листи (1890 - 1917). Київ: Наукова думка, 1973.

Пріцак О. Слово про Агатангела Кримського // Вісник Академії наук України. 1991. N 6.

Bynum C.W. Metamorphosis and Identity. New York-Cambridge (Mass): Zone Books - The MIT Press, 2001.

Bynum C.W. Wonder // American Historical Review. 1997. Vol. 102. N 1.

Permanent link to this publication: