In the XX century, historical science in the USSR developed under strong ideological pressure, which had a noticeable impact on the evolution and formation of scientific thought. The intensity of the political regime's intervention in the scientific sphere depended on the social situation, and the success and circumstances of scientists ' creative activities were directly dependent on following the guidelines set by the state. Ideological and political overtones significantly influenced the choice of topics for scientific papers, the methodology of their writing, and-most sadly-the fate of scientists.

Only in the post-Soviet period were ideological blinders abolished and it became possible to study previously "closed" topics.

The study of the creative path of a major scientist-Egyptologist, professor, Doctor of Historical Sciences, academician Mikhail Aleksandrovich Korostovtsev (1900 - 1980) provides us with a vivid example of the influence of political and ideological factors on the activity and very fate of a scientist. The repressions that M. A. Korostovtsev was subjected to could not suppress his research aspirations, and the scientific results he achieved aroused the admiration of some and the envy of others.

M. A. Korostovtsev's scientific career began rather late: at the time of entering the graduate school of the Leningrad Branch of the Institute of History of the USSR Academy of Sciences, he was 38 years old (until that time, his career was developing in the naval service, which he passed from a sailor to a captain of the Caspian and Baltic Shipping Companies). In the 1930s and 1940s, M. A. Korostovtsev was most active as a scientist. In 1939, he defended his PhD thesis on "Slavery in ancient Egypt in the New Kingdom era" 1. In 1943, he completed his doctoral dissertation "Writing and Language of ancient Egypt", in the response to which Academician V. V. Struve wrote: "All the topics and questions raised in M. A. Korostovtsev's dissertation are considered and resolved at a high methodological level and on the basis of a very large historical, ethnographic, philological and linguistic material, taking into account the New Teaching about Language" [Struve, 1943, p. 7]. Professor S. P. Tolstov2 noted that "the work of M. A. Korostovtsev is based on a very large amount of historical, ethnographic, philological and linguistic material. A. Korostovtsev is a major work that raises a huge historical and cultural problem of paramount importance and gives it an original and, in most cases, quite convincing solution" [Tolstov, 1943, p. 9].

In 1944, M. A. Korostovtsev went on a business trip to Egypt, but not for scientific purposes, but through TASS. The Russian State Archive of Socio-Political History contains a number of Korostovtsev's party records, including a Certificate from the Party Control Committee dated June 11, 1960, detailing the course of his judicial investigation in 1944-1955, starting with his arrival in Egypt as a TASS correspondent and ending with his early release from the camp, followed by a subsequent investigation of the case. rehabilitation. According to this certificate, in 1944 the scientist was sent to-

1 The choice of the dissertation topic was influenced by V. V. Struve. From the archival materials stored in the Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences, it follows that the scientist planned to make slavery in the New Kingdom era the topic of his doctoral work. As for the candidate's thesis, initially it was about the attitude of the state to the temple in ancient Egypt in the era of the XVIII-XX dynasties [Lesson plan...].

2 Tolstov Sergey Pavlovich (1907 - 1976) - historian, ethnographer, archaeologist, researcher of the history of the peoples of Central Asia; history, ethnogenesis, culture of the Karakalpak people, editor of the multi-volume publication "Peoples of the World", organizer and long-term leader of the Khorezm archaeological and ethnographic expedition (1945-1970) [Miliband, 2008, book 2, pp. 483-484].

page 106
Len returned to Egypt as a TASS correspondent and remained so until 1946, when "he was relieved of his duties as a correspondent for unsatisfactory work, and a telegram suggested that he leave for Moscow with his family" [Reference..., 1960, p. 51]. However, the scientist did not comply with this order, referring to the incompleteness of the work he started in Cairo, which was of fundamental importance to him. The archive document reads: "Korostovtsev's desire to temporarily stay in Cairo was supported by the USSR Envoy to Egypt and a resident of the MGB, who contacted the relevant authorities about this. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the USSR responded to this request that the question of Korostovtsev's further work would be resolved upon his return to Moscow "[ibid.]. This clearly shows that there was a real opportunity to extend the scientist's activities in Cairo, but already at the official level, with the determination of his status (and the special services had to take a direct part in this). Nevertheless, in July 1947, the scientist sent a letter to I. V. Stalin with a request to allow him to stay in Egypt to complete the scientific work he had begun. It should be noted that the need for Korostovtsev to stay in Cairo was diplomatically justified, in connection with the recently established relations between the USSR and Egypt (August 26, 1943). From an international point of view, the establishment of diplomatic relations was extremely important and necessary for both sides, especially in the conditions of the Second World War and in the first years after its end, and the scientist's stay in Egypt as a journalist could help strengthen scientific and cultural relations between the countries.

Repeatedly from the leadership of TASS in the person of N. G. Palgunov and M. A. Korostovtsev received demands to return to the USSR, and his disobedience caused alarm and suspicion among the leadership. The situation escalated, and M. A. Korostovtsev was removed from his correspondent position, leaving him without any pay and thus forcing him to leave Cairo. "This behavior of Korostovtsev could not but cause concern among Soviet workers, especially since after submitting his work cases to TASS, he stopped visiting the embassy, became withdrawn, began to avoid meetings with Soviet workers, and started talking about having to look for piecework scientific work in Egypt. Not seeing at this time the possibility of forcing Korostovtsev to leave for the Soviet Union, in October 1946, by agreement with the leadership of the Academy of Sciences, a letter was sent to him on behalf of the Academy, informing him that it was decided to use his stay in Cairo to collect scientific materials in the field of Egyptology" [Reference..., 1960, p.50].

The Academy's official response confirms: "The Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences is ready to give you the opportunity to complete the scientific work you started in Egypt, and considers it appropriate to use your stay in this country to fulfill the scientific tasks of the Academy of Sciences in connection with the problems of the five-year plan of the Academy of Sciences on ancient history (history of Hellenism, a city and estate in North Africa in the Roman era, the enlightenment age Roman Empire), on the history of the East " [Letter to M. A. Korostovtsev..., 1946, l. 1].

The archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences (fund of the secretariat of the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences) contains "materials and correspondence about the business trip of Professor M. A. Korostovtsev to Egypt" [ARAN, f. 2, op. 1-1946, d. 482]. The composition of the documents is of interest both from the point of view of reconstructing the course of events, and for highlighting the position taken by the scientist in this situation, which is of interest in the light of the problem of "science and power". The work done by M. A. Korostovtsev in Egypt was of great importance, he made concrete and promising proposals, the implementation of which would advance Russian science far ahead and contribute to its international recognition.

3 Nikolai Grigoryevich Palgunov (1898-1971) - General Director of TASS (until 1960). He was one of the leaders of Soviet journalism, which provided "information cover" for the Stalinist regime.

page 107
The whole complex of documents from the archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences that interests us can be divided into three groups:

1) Letters from the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences:

Letters to M. A. Korostovtsev of the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences of October 21, 1946, No. 1-6, and the Department of History and Philosophy of the USSR Academy of Sciences of June 4, 1947, No. 26/15, letter from R. Karakhan, Director of the Book Department of the USSR Academy of Sciences;

2) Reviews of the activities of M. A. Korostovtsev, Academician V. V. Struve, Yu. P. Frantsov and A. B. Ranovich in 1947.;

3) Materials of M. A. Korostovtsev sent to the Presidium of the Academy from Egypt for 1946-1947: "Plan of my personal works", "Materials for the five-year plan of the Department of History and Philosophy and the Department of Language and Thinking of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR", "On the collection of materials for planned works" and " On the organization of the Soviet scientific- research work in Egypt."

The submitted material shows that M. A. Korostovtsev tried to show the necessity and necessity of his stay in Egypt, as well as justify his non-return to the USSR by his activities. Analysis of documents shows their diversity. Most of them have only scientific content, the author writes about his research task, makes a number of proposals for consideration for the five-year work plan of the USSR Academy of Sciences, and also describes the sources of obtaining material. At the same time (chronologically more recent material), the scientist seeks to show all the possibilities of organizing scientific ties between the USSR and Egypt in the context of the international political situation of the 1940s, focusing on the usefulness and necessity of academic science in the framework of diplomatic relations between the countries.

In the plan of the scientist's personal works, dated December 18, 1946, it was emphasized that his main task was to publish and publish papyrological and epigraphic material of the end of the New Kingdom, available only in Egypt. As a result of his work, the scientist saw a monograph that includes a number of important monuments from the period of the XXI dynasty (XI-X centuries BC). "The text of the decree of NESIKHONSU 4, which I am working on, was not published. The publication of this text with a translation, commentary, and research involving other documents of a similar type that shed light on the religious views and socio-economic relations of this era will be the first part of the monograph" [ARAN, f. 26, op. 1 - 19466, d.4826, l. 21].

In addition to implementing the publication and research task, the scientist was engaged in processing unpublished texts and stelae of socio-economic content of the time of origin from the New Kingdom era, stored in the Cairo Museum and other Egyptian collections. The author emphasized the special value of the texts in the context of the problem of studying industrial relations of this period. Speaking about private collections, Korostovtsev was referring to the collection of G. Michaelides from Cairo, among the exhibits of which he drew attention to "a Greek text of religious and pantheistic content, written on a clay jug, dating from the II century BC" [ARAN, f. 2, op. 1-1946, d. 482, l. 39], a number of Greek ostracons, as well as Arabic papyri 5. In addition to the Michaelidis collection, the scientist worked with the Fatma Turan Archive, containing-

4 Nesikhonsu-daughter of the king of the XXI dynasty Nesubanebjed II, priestess of Thebes (X century BC); the decree of the god Amun was found in her burial in Deir el-Bahri [Kitchen, Sp. 463].

5 " Document on the debt of three debtors to a certain Khashqadan (later the king)" (Gidjra, 842. Private letter from the era of the Caucasian Mamelukes ' rule); "A petition addressed by a freed slave to his mistress to be returned to his homeland" (Mameluke era); "A letter from a slave named Ghani to his master about the methods of his administrative work" (Mameluke era); " Complaint against a Kutaug man "(Fatimid era); "A slave's letter to the master with a request to send money"; "An act of emancipation of a slave" (Gidzhra, 591); "A document on the debt of some persons to a high-ranking person" (Gidzhra, 510); "A document on an unknown religious sect of the Mamelukes era" [Materials for the five-year plan..., 1946]. The language and spelling are given according to the document.

page 108
He had access to the Teymur Pasha collection, which later became the property of the Egyptian National Library.

M. A. Korostovtsev considered the establishment of scientific contacts between Soviet and foreign scientists to be one of the most important aspects of his possible activities in Egypt, which seemed especially relevant in conditions when the USSR's allied relations with Western democracies in World War II were still memorable and there was still hope that after the war the Soviet state would position itself as open to external connections (at least for purely propaganda purposes)6.

"As for the topics of ak. If you read Struve's "History of the Achaemenid Empire", then at the moment I have the following useful information for the author::

First, Ghirchman, a French Iranian scholar, recently left Cairo for Iran, where he will lead the French archaeological Mission in Susa. Hirschman7 had previously dug in Afghanistan and Iran, and tried for a long time and unsuccessfully to get in touch with Professor S. Tolstov, because he knew about his excavations and works according to VDI reports, and Hirschman's scientific subject matter is closely related to the problems of our ancient Central Asia. He sent his works from Paris to Professor S. Tolstov through our embassy in Paris. He says that he has a lot of data from excavations in Afghanistan and Iran, shedding light on the problems of our ancient Central Asia. This is exactly what the actor V. V. Struve is interested in. Through VOX and our embassy in Tehran, AK V. V. Struve can easily establish scientific contact with Hirschman. Hirschman speaks excellent Russian and is very interested in the achievements of our science. He wanted to have information about our works so that he could mention them in his writings, but he did not receive this data, and he was very sorry about it. In Paris, he read a report in which he stressed that without taking into account the works of Soviet scientists, no research on Iranian studies is complete" [ARAN, f. 2, op. 1-1946, d. 482, l. 33].

It should be noted that in the 1940s Soviet scientists paid much attention to the study of socio-economic relations in the ancient East (the history of the Two Rivers-Sumer and Akkad, Babylonia and Assyria), as well as the study of the history of the Achaemenid empire and Media. Such scholars as V. I. Abaev(Abaev, 1945(1), p. 137-140; Abaev, 1945 (2), p. 126-133) began their research work on ancient Iran M. M. Dyakonov [Dyakonov, 1946, p.130-139]; they considered the problems associated with the interpretation of the Behistun and "anti - Devo" inscriptions of Xerxes, analyzed the tests of Achaemenid inscriptions. In this context, the establishment of contacts between Soviet and Western scientists was of great importance for the development of Oriental studies in general.

With regard to the works of I. Y. Krachkovsky and A. Y. Yakubovsky, the possibility of obtaining photographs of Arabic papyri from the private collection of Michaelides was proposed, who gave his consent to the publication and publication of materials on only one condition - "that our authors, using and quoting the monuments of his collection, would indicate in their works that the source is in the collection of G. I. Krachkovsky and- on Michaelides in Cairo and that it was used with the permission of the owner of the collection " [ARAN, f. 2, op. 1-1946, d. 482, l. 39].

In connection with the research of A. Y. Yakubovsky devoted to Timur, M. A. Korostovtsev, in particular, points out the presence of a large manuscript of the name of Timur.-

6 Compare, for example, the propaganda "unofficial" trips of Soviet writers ' delegations to Japan and the United States in 1946, just before the dramatic events of M. A. Korostovtsev's biography, which are discussed here [Simonov, 2005, pp. 343-353].

7 Ghirshman Roman M. (1895-1979) was a French archaeologist and historian of the Near and Middle East. In the 1940s and 1950s, he explored Neolithic caves in western Iran, pre-Achaemenid and Achaemenid settlements near Suz, and Elamite monuments in Choga-Zembil.

page 109
the Maphal al-Safi library, stored in Cairo. "This manuscript has never been published, but a brief description of the biographies contained in it is available in a special work of the Arabist Vietet, published in French. The author, through me, will send his book to A. Y. Yakubovsky in exchange for one of A. Y. Yakubovsky's works, which he will indicate in a special letter. Upon receiving the book, Vieta Jakubowski will be able to tell me which parts of this huge manuscript need to be copied or photographed for his work "[ibid.].

As can be seen from the above information, the work done by the scientist was of great value and had good prospects not only for specific scientific research, but also for establishing permanent scientific ties between Soviet and foreign orientalists. One of the forms of such contacts could be an exchange of publications both between individual scientists and at the interinstitutional level. M. A. Korostovtsev, in particular, suggested sending several copies of the article by I. M. Lurie devoted to the study of elements of the animal epic in Ancient Egypt [Lurie, 1939, pp. 61-93] and the work of I. A. Orbeli and others. K. V. Trever on the Sasanian metal (Orbeli and Trever, 1935), in exchange for which, according to the scientist, the library of the Academy of Sciences could receive a number of interesting local publications. M. A. Korostovtsev draws attention to the following circumstance that the head of the Cultural Department of the League of Arab States, Yusuf Esh, asked him to get a list of Russian and foreign publications. Soviet works on ancient and medieval Arabic studies, so that you can choose from them for subsequent translation and publication in Arabic. Here we can clearly see the interest of the Egyptian public in getting acquainted with the scientific results of our science. In addition, according to the scientist, the Arab League planned to undertake a large publication of the most important Arabic manuscripts from all over the world, and therefore wanted to get photos of interesting manuscripts from Soviet collections.

Among the priority tasks of Egyptology, the scientist highlights the problem of preserving hieroglyphic inscriptions that are subject to destruction. M. A. Korostovtsev planned to undertake a photo expedition in Gebel Silsil and Hatnub with the subsequent publication of the results. "There are a number of unpublished texts in both of these paragraphs. Photographing them and publishing them will save them for science, because the inscriptions on the rocks themselves are gradually being destroyed and disappear. I wanted to organize such a photo expedition in Wadi Hammamat, where Golenishchev started working, and thus continue the Russian scientific tradition here, but I encountered an unexpected obstacle: on behalf of King Farouk personally and at his expense, a certain GOYON 8 already began photographing the texts of Wadi Hammamat and found over 60 completely unknown inscriptions, including Greek ones. It is quite understandable that, in view of these circumstances, I abandoned my original intention. My negotiations with the Director of the Antiquities Service were successful - he allowed me to work in Gebel Silsil and Hatnub" [ARAN, f. 2, op. 1-1946, d. 482, l. 21]. Academician V. V. Struve, in his review of the activities of M. A. Korostovtsev, emphasized the importance of this work: "The organization of such an expedition can also be important as an exploration of future Soviet excavations in the Nile Valley. Such scientific events will bring our Soviet Egyptologists closer together not only with European researchers of ancient history, but also with the Egyptian public, which now pays great attention to the glorious past of its homeland" [ARAN, f. 2, op. 1 - 1946, d.482, l. 46].

Important and significant proposals include the exchange of scientific literature between the USSR and Egypt, as well as the resumption of the interrupted exchange of publications with the French Institute of Archaeology in Cairo. On December 20, 1946, the scientist writes:

8 Hereafter, the author's spelling and punctuation are preserved in the documents. J. Goyon is a well-known French archaeologist, a student of P. Monte and his collaborator on the Tanis excavations in the Eastern Nile Delta; in the 1940s and early 1950s, he was the court archaeologist of King Farouk of Egypt. For the results of his epigraphic studies in Wadi Hammamat, see Goyon (1957).

page 110
"It is necessary to establish a systematic exchange of scientific book products between our scientific institutions and research institutions in Egypt.

First of all, with the French Institute of Oriental Archaeology9 in Cairo, because this institute is very interested in receiving our literature - in the Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences, Marr's five-volume book, Notes of the College of Orientalists, etc.

In the summer of 1944, the director of the French Institute, Cointz, at the request of the Fundamental Library of the Academy of Sciences, sent a large batch of valuable scientific publications with a request to send Soviet books in return.

However, so far the French Institute has received nothing from the USSR, not even a commendation, and Kuentz expresses deep bewilderment about this. This misunderstanding must somehow be settled, especially since there is not a single set of Marr's works in Egypt, and in general there is absolutely no Soviet scientific literature " [ARAN, f. 2, op. 1-1946, d. 482, l. 36].

In the plan of the scientist's work, attention was also paid to the problems of modern Egypt, in particular, the joint publication of two reference manuals with the first secretary of the Soviet mission, A. A. Shvedov10. The scientist writes: "The first secretary of our mission in Egypt, A. A. Shvedov, is collecting materials for a monograph on the Suez Canal, which he is going to submit as a dissertation for the candidate's degree. If he were to secure appropriate advice from the Institute of Oriental Studies he would be able to complete his task. After all, he has a big advantage: while here in Cairo, he can use sources and documents that are not available elsewhere.

He is also working on a handbook on modern Egypt, i.e. the most recent official data obtained from a number of government and other institutions. I will also take part in this work, because my two-year work as a correspondent gives me the opportunity to contribute to this work.

It seems to me that not always, but in some cases, such combinations as I propose with A. A. Shvedov can bring significant benefits both in the field of science and in the field of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs" [ibid.].

Among the significant problems of modern Egypt that needed to be addressed, Mikhail Alexandrovich highlights the issue related to the national liberation movement in the Arab East, the activities of the League of Arab States; the national question in Palestine, oil policy in the Middle East. The scientist considers it a priority to study the literature and history of modern Egypt (from Muhammad Ali to the beginning of World War II), as well as the functioning of the Suez Canal, which plays a huge role in world politics and international communications. The political line is also clearly visible here, showing that in addition to scientific goals, M. A. Korostovtsev also pursued international and social goals. In a note on the organization of research work in Egypt on February 23, 1947, M. A. Korostovtsev makes it clear that it is necessary to organize permanent contacts with the countries of the Arab East. The scientist repeatedly emphasizes the need to conduct such work systematically and constantly, citing the activities of the French and Americans as an example.

"Now, after the great victory of the USSR in the Patriotic War, the USSR has become one of the "three big ones", i.e. the international situation has radically changed in our favor;

9 The Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale (IFAO) is a research institution established in the late 19th century. for conducting archaeological research primarily in Egypt [http://www.ifao.egnet.net]. In 1940-1953 the director of IFAO was Sh. Kuentz (Ch. Kuentz).

10 Alexey A. Shvedov (1915-1965), diplomat, Candidate of Historical Sciences, in 1945-1950-First Secretary of the Soviet mission in Egypt, in the 1960s - Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the USSR to Morocco, Head of the 1st African Department of the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

page 111
Secondly, normal diplomatic relations have been established between the USSR and most of the countries of the Arab East. This means that now there is an OBJECTIVE OPPORTUNITY to establish and organize permanent scientific live communication with the countries of the Arab East.

That such a connection is necessary and useful was recognized as early as 1943 at a joint meeting of two branches of the USSR Academy of Sciences in Moscow: Ed. History and Philosophy and Ed. Language and Thinking. Then my report on this issue was approved.

From the previous presentation, it is quite clear that the scientific work of Ak. Science in the countries of the Arab East can have not only purely scientific, but also political significance, especially in the problems of the modern East.

The Academy of Sciences of the USSR, which was a consultant to the Soviet Government on a wide variety of scientific issues, can be a very valuable consultant for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Eastern issues, because the Academy of Sciences has more opportunities, as a scientific organization, to study the East than the Ministry of Foreign Affairs " [ARAN, f. 2, op. 1-1946, d. 482, l. 18].

The note on the organization of Soviet scientific research work of February 23, 1947 contains political considerations. The scientist emphasizes the apolitical nature of Egyptian science and the assistance of the Egyptian government to scientists in organizing scientific expeditions, but, nevertheless, speaks of a certain degree of distrust and caution in relation to the USSR. The scientist makes a concrete and very promising proposal, which consisted in creating a representative office of the USSR Academy of Sciences in the Middle East, with a permanent stay in Cairo. The main functions of the representative office, according to the scientist, were to be research work, organization of scientific communication between the USSR and the countries of the Arab East and acquaintance of the Arab world with the results of scientific activities of Soviet scientists.

M. A. Korostovtsev asks for a scientific trip of two prominent representatives of Soviet Oriental studies-the Arabist academician I. Y. Krachkovsky and the Egyptologist Academician V. V. Struve, whose scientific reputation, in the scientist's opinion, would not require any recommendation. The trip of these scientists could have a practical and positive result. At the same time, M. A. Korostovtsev emphasizes that the secondmentees of V. In Struve and I. Y. Krachkovsky could decide on the spot on the measures and actions necessary for the organization of the Soviet representation of the Academy of Sciences in Cairo, i.e. be its main organizers. Mikhail Alexandrovich writes:: "I emphasize that they can be sent easily, and there is no need to wait for an invitation from the Egyptian government. THE EGYPTIAN GOVERNMENT NEVER INVITES ANY SCIENTISTS TO EGYPT, except those who are officially in the Egyptian service. Without inviting scientists from other countries, it will not make a special exception for Soviet scientists, but it will allow them to come" [ARAN, f. 2, op. 1-1946, d. 482, l. 20].

In 1947, at the request of the Presidium of the Academy, reviews of reputable scientists with a high reputation were written on the work done and the planned plans of Korostovtsev, the assessment of which would not cause doubts and hesitation.

The Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences received reviews about the activities of M. A. Korostovtsev, Academician V. V. Struve, Professors Yu. P. Frantsov and A. B. Ranovich. V. V. Struve's review gave M. A. Korostovtsev a more than positive assessment. The academician emphasized his merits to the national science and expressed special gratitude for the help and information provided, which is necessary in the research work.

Yu. P. Frantsov recognized the" basic correctness " of the scientist's activity, but with a big reservation, pointing out the ambiguity and lack of specifics on a number of the scientist's proposals: "The actions of our Soviet scientists are more or less random.-

page 112
Without accurate data on the progress of these scientists ' research, I think this is a difficult task. I would advise you to direct M. A. Korostovtsev's energy to study a certain group of monuments (by epoch or character), so that at the end of his work he can publish a complete and complete review, doing various reference work only in passing" [Frantsov, 1946, p.48].

A. B. Ranovich's opinion was that the activity of M. A. Korostovtsev was important, but not of primary importance, and the main emphasis should be placed on the work, using the material available in the USSR and stored in domestic museums: "M. A. Korostovtsev reminds us of the task that our scientists face to surpass the achievements of science outside our country. We can achieve this, and in part we have already achieved it, not so much by photographing and publishing another text (this is also necessary and important), but by creating and developing a new, higher type of historical science, a science built on the basis of Marxist-Leninist theory. Despite all the technical achievements of foreign science, our Oriental studies are immeasurably superior. Western European history, etc. History is a chaos of accidents or, at best, a pragmatic systematization of facts; in our country it is primarily understood as a natural historical process. This is a huge advantage of our science, even in areas where it is still technically relatively poorly equipped. Her ideas are already beginning to gain recognition in foreign science, and the task is to secure a leading place in historical and linguistic science and lead progressive groups of foreign scientists.

Once upon a time there were business trips of young scientists abroad to work in museums, book repositories, etc. Many of these scientists made Russian science famous. I think that this is the most appropriate way to design M. A. Korostovtsev's work in Cairo. Working on his special subject-the study of the history of the little-explored transition period of the XXI dynasty-without wasting his time and energy on side topics and other works, he will be able, presumably, to benefit Soviet science. At the same time, he will be able to help our scientists with scientific information, establishing scientific contacts, etc." [Ranovich, 1946, p. 53].

In June 1947. The Academy of Sciences of the USSR invited M. A. Korostovtsev to go to Moscow for a personal report on the scientific work he had done in Cairo. It is noteworthy that in the case there are two versions of the decision regarding the scientist. The final version, sent to M. A. Korostovtsev in Cairo, had an edit that clearly shows that A. B. Ranovich's review was of decisive importance, and-moreover-a number of speech turns were borrowed in the official response - this can also be seen from a philological point of view...

In a letter dated June 4, 1947. The Department of History and Philosophy reported: "The Department of History and Philosophy considers it necessary for the implementation of our scientific proposals, your return to Moscow in the near future and a personal report from the Bureau of the department" [Letter to M. A. Korostovtsev..., 1947, l. 62-63].

The report of the Party Control Committee shows: "However, he again declined to leave, citing the need for him to stay in Egypt until the completion of the work that had already been started and partially submitted to the press. By this time, it became known that he had entered into an intimate relationship with a White immigrant Salina, a widow, the former wife of an employee of the British embassy, expressed his intention to marry her and break off relations with his wife, who lived with him in Cairo. In view of the fact that Korostovtsev for more than a year, despite repeated offers, evaded leaving for the USSR, and the connection with Salina went far and foreigners started talking about it, the embassy management decided to take measures to speed up his departure to his homeland. In July 1947, under the pretext of conducting intelligence work in Palestine, he was invited by the relevant authorities to travel with his wife to Beirut. He is this assignment

page 113
He accepted and upon arrival in Beirut, together with his wife, was invited to the Soviet steamship Pobeda, where he was detained and taken to the Soviet Union.

M. A. Korostovtsev was accused by the investigative authorities in 1948 of having established a criminal relationship with a number of foreign intelligence officers and their agents in Egypt and refused to return to the USSR, for which he was sentenced to 25 years in prison, and his wife to 10 years in prison.

A subsequent audit conducted in 1954 found no confirmation of these accusations. In this regard, on January 3, 1955, the resolution of the Special Meeting under the MGB of the USSR of May 29, 1948 on the conviction of Korostovtsev and his wife was canceled and their case was terminated" [Reference..., 1960, l. 51].

In 1960, the scientist was reinstated in the CPSU, and in 1974 he was elected a full member of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

On the example of the situation that has developed around M. A. Korostovtsev, one can clearly see the dramatic fate of an outstanding scientist in the 1940s in the Soviet Union. The circumstances developed in such a way that the ideology of the Soviet political system outweighed the scientific and diplomatic merits of a particular individual, and the development of Soviet-Egyptian friendship was not among the priority problems. As a result, all the proposals and activities of the scientist were considered through the prism of Soviet ideology - his actions and decisions were supposed to serve the propaganda of Soviet ideas on the territory of Egypt, which M. A. Korostovtsev cared less about (there is not a word about distribution and propaganda in any document sent to the scientist from Cairo in 1946-1947 Soviet ideology in the Arab East).

Claims to the scientist on the part of the Soviet state are clearly formulated in the review of A. B. Ranovich: "We have to reckon with the fact that if a French or American scientist, writer, journalist abroad is viewed primarily as a private person who is responsible for his own mistakes and reaps the fruits of his success, then the Soviet scientist, writer a journalist is viewed as a representative of the Soviet Union, an exponent of its ideology. This increases the responsibility of the Soviet scientist abroad" [Ranovich, 1946, p. 53].

M. A. Korostovtsev was convicted for "anti-Soviet activities", for the lack of manifestations of the "vanguard role of a communist" and unworthy behavior of a party member... Later, after rehabilitation, Soviet science was still able to recognize and evaluate the merits of the scientist, from a scientific point of view, his activities in the last years of his life developed more than successfully. The works of M. A. Korostovtsev have not lost their relevance in the XXI century.

list of literature

Abaev V. I. Anti-Devo inscription of Xerxes / / Iranian languages, Moscow, 1945(1).
Abaev, V. I., The inscription of Darius I on the construction of the Palace in Susa, Iranskiye yazyki, Moscow, 1945 (2).

Diakonov M. M. Istoriya drevnego Irana (avtoreferat doktorskoy dissertatsii) [History of ancient Iran (abstract of the doctoral dissertation)]. 1946. N 1.

Korostovtsev M. A. Materials to the five-year plan of the Department of History and Philosophy and the Department of Language and Thinking of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Authorized typescript with edits. Cairo, December 20, 1946 / / AR AN. f. 2. Op. 1-1946. d. 482. L. 25-37.

Korostovtsev M. A. On collecting materials for planned works. Authorized typescript with edits. Cairo, January 28, 1947 / / ARAN. F. 2. Op. 1-1946. D. 482. L. 38-41.

Korostovtsev M. A. On the organization of Soviet scientific research work in Egypt. Authorized typescript. Cairo, February 23, 1947 / / ARAN. F. 2. Op. 1-1946. D. 482. L. 7-20.

Korostovtsev M. A. Plan of my personal works. Authorized typescript. Cairo, December 18, 1946 / / ARAN. F. 2. Op. 1-1946. d. 482. L. 21-24.

Lurie I. M. Elements of the Animal epic in Ancient Egyptian images / / State Hermitage Museum. Proceedings of the Department of History of Culture and Art of the East. Vol. 1. L., 1939.

Materials to the five-year plan of the Department of History and Philosophy and the Department of Language and Thinking of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR / / ARAN. F. 2. Op. 1-1946. D. 482. L. 33.

page 114
Miliband S. D. Orientalists of Russia: bibliographic dictionary. In 2 books, Moscow, 2008.

Orbeli I. A., Trever K. V. Sasanid metal. Moscow-L., 1935.

Letter to M. A. Korostovtsev from the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences, dated October 21, 1946, for N 1 - 6 // ARAN. F. 2. Op. 1-1946. D. 482. L. 1-2.

Letter to M. A. Korostovtsev of the Department of History and Philosophy of the USSR Academy of Sciences No. 26/15 dated June 4, 1947 / / ARAN. f. 2. Op. 1-1946. d. 482. L. 62-63.

Letter to M. A. Korostovtsev, Director of the Book Department of the USSR Academy of Sciences R. Karakhan / / ARAN. F. 2. Op. 1-1946. D. 482. L. 3.

Plan of post-graduate student Korostovtsev's classes / / ARAN. f. 411. Op. 6. d. 1660. L. 10-11.

Ranovich A. B. Otzok o deyatel'nosti M. A. Korostovtseva ot 30 May 1947 g. [Review of the activities of M. A. Korostovtsev from May 30, 1947]. ARAN. f. 2. Op. 1 - 1946.D. 482. L. 50-53.

Simonov K. Through the eyes of a person of my generation. Favorites: Poems. Reflections, Moscow, 2005.
Struve, V. V., The inscription of Xerxes on the "devas" and the religion of the Persians, Izvestiya Akademii nauk SSSR, 1944, No. 3.
Struve V. V. New data on the history of Armenia, attested by the Behustun inscription // Izvestiya AN Armyanskoy SSR. 1946. N 8.

Struve V. V. Otzok o deyatel'nosti M. A. Korostovtsev ot 21 aprelya 1947 g. [Review of the activity of M. A. Korostovtsev from April 21, 1947].

Struve, V. V., Review of M. A. Korostovtsev's dissertation "The Letter and Language of Ancient Egypt", submitted for the doctoral degree, Biblioteka M. A. Korostovtsev. Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. N3244. 1943. p. 7.

Reference of the Committee for Party Control of June 11, 1960 / / Russian State Archive of Socio-political History. f. 589. d. 15191. Op. 3. l. 49-51.

Tolstov S. P. Review of M. A. Korostovtsev's doctoral dissertation " The Letter and Language of ancient Egypt "(the experience of cultural and historical research). Biblioteka M. A. Korostovtsev. Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, N 3244, 1943, p. 9.

Frantsov Yu. P. Otzok o deyatel'nosti M. A. Korostovtsev ot 20 aprelya 1947 g. [Review of the activity of M. A. Korostovtsev from April 20, 1947].

Goyon G. Nouvelles inscriptions rupestres du Wadi Hammamat. P., 1957.

Kitchen K.A. Neschons // LA. Bd. IV. Sp. 463.

http://www.ifao.egnet.net

page 115

Permanent link to this publication: