You are on page 1of 21

Ethnomusicology Forum

Vol. 14, No. 2, November 2005, pp. 165 /184

Musical Heritage and National Identity


in Uzbekistan
Alexander Djumaev

The author considers how the idea of musical heritage was explored by the different
cultural powers and activists in pre-revolutionary Central Asia, and in Soviet and
independent Uzbekistan during the 20th and early 21st centuries. Muslim enlighteners
and intellectuals (jadids), prominent Uzbek Soviet writers, poets, musicologists and
other intellectuals all dealt with musical heritage. Among them were important figures
in the history of Uzbek culture: Abdurauf Fitrat and Abdulla Qodiriy (Kadiri), Viktor
Uspenskiy and Evsei Cherniavskiy, Yunus and Is’hoq Rajabov and others. Special
emphasis is placed on the key figure in the development of national musical identity
in Uzbekistan, Abdurauf Fitrat (who was purged in 1938). Attitudes to heritage
are shown through the struggle between ‘‘old’’ and ‘‘new’’ in pre-revolutionary times,
in the framework of the Soviet political system and cultural policy, and in its use as
a tool of national-ethnic mobilization in the current development of the nation state
of Uzbekistan. In the contemporary period the new cultural powers are trying to
re-establish a line of succession for national music linking ancient times to the
present. Two main sources pertaining to national musical identity are considered in
the article: written texts (historical manuscripts, contemporary national studies, samples
of traditional music notated according to the Western staff system) and a body of
‘national’ melodies and the emotional images of the national spiritual world which they
evoke.

Keywords: Tradition; Musical Heritage; National Identity; Central Asia; Uzbekistan

Alexander Djumaev received his PhD in music (musicology) from the Khamza Institute of Art Research of the
Ministry of Culture of Uzbekistan in 1981 and headed the Department of Music History at the same institute
from 1984 to 1993. From1997 to 2004 he was coordinator of the Arts and Culture Program at the Open Society
Institute (Soros Foundation) / Uzbekistan. He is currently Regional Coordinator of the Program of the Aga
Khan Music Initiative in Central Asia and member of the Sub-Board of the Arts and Culture Network Program
of the Open Society Institute-Budapest. He is Liaison Officer of the International Council for Traditional Music.
His research interests are music cultures of Central Asia; aesthetics, theory and history of the Maqamat; Islam
and music; medieval written sources on music; cultural policy in Central Asia. Email: adjumaev@yahoo.com

ISSN 1741-1912 (print)/ISSN 1741-1920 (online) # 2005 Taylor & Francis


DOI: 10.1080/17411910500329732
166 A. Djumaev

The objectives of this article are to trace the evolution of the concept of ‘‘musical
heritage’’ as it occurs in Uzbek musicology and to reveal the principal sources of the
formation of a national musical identity in the public consciousness, artistic/creative
work and emotional-aesthetic perception of a certain strata of the population of
Uzbekistan. The period under consideration extends from the beginning of the 20th
century, when heritage was looked upon as being based on commonly held Muslim
cultural values, to the first decade of the 21st century. Particularly during the
independence period, since 1991, musical heritage has been actively used as a tool to
form a national self-consciousness and cultural identity. One could even say that a
major part of the ‘‘musical heritage’’ concept took shape in the latter phase, when it
has played an important role in the process of establishing a cultural identity for the
nation as a whole.1
I distinguish two main sources, which correspond to two principal layers of
heritage. Together they shape the character of national musical identity in Uzbekistan.
The first consists of written texts, including historical manuscripts, contemporary
national studies and samples of traditional music notated according to the Western
staff system. The second consists of a body of national melodies and ‘‘intonations’’,2
as well as the emotional images of the national spiritual world which they evoke.
Apart from these two main sources, other sources also mould national musical
identity. I will assess all these sources after a brief review of the evolution of the
concept of musical heritage.

The Evolution of the Concept of Musical Heritage


Appeals to heritage, its interpretation and the priority given to distinct layers changed
during the course of the 20th century depending on the socio-political situation. In
line with wider historical processes, three major stages can be identified in the process
of an emergent national musical identity. These are the:
. Pre-revolutionary, manifested in creative works of Muslim enlighteners,
modern Central Asian intellectuals known as jadids 3 (see Khalid 1998; Sartori
2003) and official Islamic representatives in Central Asia.
. Soviet, where cultural initiatives occurred within the policy and institutions of
Soviet Uzbekistan and the other republics of Central Asia and Kazakhstan.
. Independence.

It should be kept in mind that the installation of the Soviet system, and
subsequently that of the contemporary independent state of Uzbekistan, involved the
demolition of the previous systems of cultural values (‘‘heritage’’), which became
subject to destruction or radical critique, revision and adaptation. Nevertheless, one
can observe through the whole 20th century the successive development of a single
line represented in the idea of a national music tradition. A national music identity
and national self-consciousness emerged on the basis of this idea.
Ethnomusicology Forum 167

The search for symbols of national music identity started in the pre-revolutionary
period (the end of the 19th century and the first decade of the 20th century). This was
facilitated by publication of materials on Muslim culture (musulmon madaniyati),
architectural monuments and customs and traditions of the peoples of the Central
Asia region. These vernacular editions, which included newspapers and magazines
named Tarjimon, Vaqt, Shuro and Aina, were printed in Kazan, Ufa, Orenburg,
Bakhchisarai and in towns across Central Asia. These publications, as well as the
special works of the jadids and the representatives of canonical Islam, did not yet
conceptualize the notion of ‘‘heritage’’ or ‘‘musical heritage’’. Instead, the culture of
the past was regarded as the traditions and customs ‘‘of our grandfathers’’ (ota-
bobolaridan qolgan) (see, for example, Bukhoro Qozi Kaloni 1908; Anon. 1914;
Bukhari 1914). Even in the middle of 1920s, Abdurauf Fitrat (1927, 71), author of the
first special work on Uzbek music (see below), writes on the ‘‘historical value of our
music’’ (musiqiymizning tarikhiy boiligi ), but does not refer to the term ‘‘heritage’’.
Although the Muslim culture of pre-revolutionary Central Asia is often
characterized as an internally contradiction-free, unified phenomenon, oppositions
started to emerge due to the activities of the jadids. Two of these are especially worth
mentioning: first, there appeared an opposition between the ‘‘old’’ (qadim) and the
‘‘new’’ (jadid), encompassing different spheres of culture and artistic creativity
(poetry, music, theatre, etc.) (see Sami‘ 1914);4 second, some jadids began to identify
an opposition between particular languages and related cultures; for example,
‘‘Turkic’’ was opposed to ‘‘Persian’’.
In music and poetry, the presence of the ‘‘old’’ and the ‘‘new’’ was perceived rather
distinctly and definitely. The poet Khislat (Said Haibatullah Khadja ibn Arifkhadja
Ishan Tashkandi, 1880 1945), a compiler of a bayoz (a collection of poems by
/

different poets) for a famous Tashkent singer Mulla Toichi Khan Hafiz ibn Tash
Muhammad Tashkandi (Mulla Toichi Tashmuhamedov, 1868 1943), writes in a
/

foreword to his publication Armughoni Khislat (literally, ‘‘Khislat’s gift’’): ‘‘It is


known that bayozes have been repeatedly published, but this one for the first time
does not contain old, already-heard ghazals [kuhna va eski eshitilgan ghazallardin],
previously published in bayozes, but includes ghazals entirely unheard and unknown
before’’ (Khislat 1912, 4).
The division of a cultural heritage formerly shared between nations was a result of
the second, linguistic, opposition. This opposition was enhanced due to the cultural
influence of Turkey in this epoch, which was expressed through the cultural policy of
Ataturk and the Unity and Progress organization. (The latter was a Turkish bourgeois
and nationalistic organization, founded in 1889, which aimed to struggle against
absolutism.) One of the most prominent and active jadids, Abdurauf Fitrat, who
became a father of the national model of Uzbek musical culture and a founder of the
concept of national identity in musical culture, was a partisan of the Turkish model of
cultural construction.
Yet ‘‘cultural values’’ were not yet linked to or divided among concrete nations.
Instead, culture was considered the common property of Muslims (ahli Islom),
168 A. Djumaev

a Muslim community (musulmon jamiyati) or ‘‘the Islamic nation’’ (millati Islom),


even if, in individual cases, certain aspects were identified as belonging to separate
Muslim peoples  Persians, Arabs, etc. Art works, created within the frame of Islamic
/

culture, were often called by a general term sanoi nafisa or, according to Fitrat (1993:
36) go‘zal san’atlar (fine arts). Like ‘‘heritage’’, they were often presented as examples
of a category of Islamic culture that stood in opposition to European civilization.
The idea of a total cultural heritage with its multiple variations, be it literary,
architectural, manuscript or musical heritage, developed as a result of Soviet cultural
policy. The term ‘‘cultural heritage’’ was actively employed in society at the very
beginning of Soviet cultural building in Uzbekistan.5 It claimed a certain amount of
space in magazine editions in the 1920s and ’30s, which were published first in Arabic
script and then later in the Roman alphabet. The concept of ‘‘heritage’’ was applied to
music later than its use with regard to the other arts. It was previously used, it seems,
to refer to forms of old literature and above all for classical court poetry and related
styles. For instance, examples of creative literary works (mostly poetry), compiled and
published by Fitrat (1928: v) were characterized as ‘‘old cultural heritage’’ (eski
madaniy meros). Still, as has been already mentioned, the notion of ‘‘heritage’’
(meros) is totally non-existent in Fitrat’s book of 1927, which assesses Uzbek classical
music and its history. Instead, he refers to notions like ‘‘old-new’’ (eski-yangi) and
related expressions: ‘‘our old melodies’’ (bizning eski kuilarimiz), ‘‘our old tambur
players’’ (eski tanburchilarimiz), ‘‘our old music scholars’’ (eski musiqashunoslarimiz )
and the ‘‘historical value of our music’’ (musiqiymizning tarikhiy boiligi) (Fitrat 1993:
10, 27, 35, 51). This usage is not by chance. Fitrat treats an old tradition as a live
developing tradition, which should be integrated into modern culture under new
historic conditions.
The direct source of the term ‘‘heritage’’ may lie with the well-known Russian
music ethnographer, folklorist and composer Viktor Alexandrovich Uspenskiy
(1879 1949) who came to Russian Turkestan (Central Asia) before the Revolution.
/

In the early 1920s Uspenskiy was invited by Fitrat to assist his projects in the sphere of
preservation of musical traditions. From then until the middle of 1930s they both
dealt with the same musical-historical materials and stayed in close collaboration
(Djumaev 2000a). Uspenskiy introduced the phrase ‘‘musical heritage’’ (‘‘the heritage
of the past’’) into academic usage in Uzbekistan, employing it in specific reference to
Uzbek music in his early (1927) article ‘‘Classical music of the Uzbeks (towards
resources for studying classical music poems-maqoms)’’, published the same year as
the above-mentioned book by Abdurauf Fitrat.
The widespread adoption of the notion of heritage by scholars and commentators
in the region was stimulated for three different reasons. First, at the beginning of the
construction of a new socialist proletarian culture there was a corresponding necessity
to work out an attitude towards the enormous body of traditional Muslim culture.
This required the distinct definition and differentiation of cultural layers, and a
process of cutting away those that did not totally meet the new requirements (among
them, those with religious texts or themes) and the selection of those which might be
Ethnomusicology Forum 169

Figure 1 Abdurauf Fitrat with Two Unknown Persons in Bukhara (Central State Archive
of Film and Photo Documents of Uzbekistan, No. 0-72648).

used in the new society, after special treatment and clearance. Second, an interest in
heritage emerged from an ongoing struggle with what were seen as alien ideologies.
Pertinent here was the expulsion of historiographical schools of Russian ‘‘bourgeois
scholars’’ (for example, the school of Vasiliy V. Bartold), which were charged with
having rejected or underestimated the rich cultural and historical heritage of the local
peoples (see, for example, Gurevich 1934). The valorization of this heritage was seen
170 A. Djumaev

as an antidote to fascist racist ideology during the Second World War. Also subject to
criticism were the bourgeois concepts of European and American scholars, which
were felt to exaggerate the role of Arab, Persian and other external cultures and to
minimize the cultural achievements, independence and originality of Central Asian
peoples. Third, under the socialist system it was considered necessary to provide a
stimulus for national pride and a basis for construction of new culture by dividing
heritage ‘‘equally’’ between the various fraternal Central Asian peoples.
Already during the Bukharan People’s Soviet Republic (BPSR) (1920 4) the /

necessity of working out an attitude to the large cultural inheritance of the past had
occurred to the jadids. For instance, Faizulla Khodjaev (1896 1938), a leader of the
/

BPSR and later Head of the Government of Soviet Uzbekistan, viewed the heritage of
Bukhara as old Arab-Iranian culture that had remained from the past (eskilikdan
iborat bo‘lib qolgan arab-iron madaniyati) (Khodjaev 1926, 9). For him and for those
who shared his views (among the first of whom was Abdurauf Fitrat), it was
important to translate this heritage into terms that made it fully part of the culture of
the new Uzbek socialist nation. This was no easy task  already during the first years
/

of Soviet power (and to a lesser extent during the following decades) approaches
towards cultural heritage were made from the point of view of class struggle and the
need to change socio-economic formations. An example is offered by a poem by
Ghairati (1926) entitled ‘‘Tanburchi qizga’’ (‘‘To a girl playing the tanbur’’), published
in a woman’s magazine Yangi yo‘l (New Way), which served the women’s section of
the Communist Party of Uzbekistan. The poem is a call to break and throw away the
tanbur, to listen not to its melancholic tunes, but to the factory whistle.
At the same time, in the 1920s, this new ideological perspective did not prevent the
publishing of musical and poetic texts in large-scale volumes. Such editions, as a rule,
gave a critical appraisal in their introductory articles or notes. The necessity of
studying the cultural heritage was assumed to be beyond doubt, even if that study
proceeded from new critical positions. In an introductory article to Fitrat’s book
O‘zbek adabiyoti namunalari (1928, v) Communist Party member Atadjan
Khashimov wrote on the necessity ‘‘to know well the old cultural heritage’’ (eski
madaniy merosni yakhshi bilish).
The introduction of the notion of ‘‘musical heritage’’ was a turning point in the
development of musical culture in Uzbekistan. As has been suggested already, the idea
of heritage in a European sense was not a characteristic of Central Asia culture. It
reflected instead the European cultural situation, in particular the formation of
national art schools (in the creative works of the romantics) and more broadly the
making of nation states. An author’s individual approach and the idea of struggle led
to a change of styles and trends, with a great variety of personal expressions forming
the basis of European artistic experience at this new time. In the course of this
process, a distinct division arose between classical and modern art, and heritage and
innovation, among other similar oppositions.
The aesthetics of identity in the urban Muslim culture of Central Asia also
displayed the presence of different schools and traditions, and so there existed a
Ethnomusicology Forum 171

concept of authorship in the sphere of musical creativity. But the latter was not a
matter of principle, and was not protected by strictly fixed musical texts (scores), let
alone laws on authors’ rights. A piece of art might remain ‘‘of the present’’ for a long
time (potentially endlessly) in various performance versions and variants, without
entering the category of heritage. On the other hand, when it disappeared from
the physical memory of musicians it was forgotten by the tradition bearers and so
did not qualify as respected heritage then either. The antagonism between ‘‘old’’
(qadim) and ‘‘new’’ (jadid), which became sharp during the activities of jadids,
drew some attention to this opposition but did not lead to a change in the
understanding of the concept of heritage across the nation as a whole. For example, a
well-known enlightener, Hamza Hakim-zade Niyazi (1889 1929), was the first to try
/

to renew the contents of the textual and musical parts in his songs, yet his action was
widely looked upon as revolutionary and as destructive of centuries-old canonic
foundations.
The division of musical culture of Uzbekistan into ‘‘modern creativity’’ and
‘‘heritage of the past’’, then, brought a new contradictory element into it. Not only did
this contradiction significantly complicate the process of cultural development, but it
also communicated its inner dynamism to musical culture. At the same time, heritage
came to be seen as national property, the principal element of national culture and
national (ethnic) identity, an attitude that had always existed within Soviet cultural
policy (in open or hidden form).6 Such an approach left open the opportunity to re-
think artistic heritage in the future. A huge layer of ‘‘cultural material’’, collected and
restored in the Soviet time, was actively re-thought and used in the formation of
national identity following independence.

Written Texts as the Source of National Musical Identity


Two key figures who created texts concerning musical culture, Abdurauf Fitrat
(1886 1938) and Abdulla Qodiriy (1894 1940; in Russian transcription  Kadiri),
/ / /

played a major role in the development of Uzbek national self-consciousness and


national identity. They were both purged during the Soviet period following
accusations of ‘‘bourgeois nationalism’’ and ‘‘pan-Turkism’’, but their contributions
remain crucial even today. Fitrat’s research provided a scholarly grounding for the
notion of a national music (see Djumaev 1993, 1997, 2000a), whereas Qodiriy’s
historical novel created a profound artistic interpretation of music in the spiritual life
of traditional Uzbek society.
Abdurauf Fitrat wrote his main work in the sphere of musicology O‘zbek klassik
musiqasi va uning tarikhi (‘‘Uzbek classical music and its history’’) in 1926. Published
in Samarkand-Tashkent in Arabic script in 1927, it was re-published in Tashkent in
1993 in Cyrillic. In this work Fitrat built the basis of a national musicology, which
reflected four principal aspects:
1. He was the first to try to define the place of Uzbek national music in the context of
the culture of the Muslim world (showing commonalities, differences and the
172 A. Djumaev

impact of the music of Uzbeks, Arabs, Persians, Turks, Azerbaijanis, Indians and
other peoples), in comparison to European musical culture and to wider global
processes.
2. Fitrat grounded a concept of Uzbek ‘‘classical music’’, incorporating its historical
and theoretical bases and accentuating its Turkic components and origins.
3. He integrated within this Uzbek tradition many achievements of the past, which
were part of common Muslim, Persian or local traditions (for example, those of
Bukhara and Khorezm).
4. He formulated the principles for the study of Uzbek traditional music, resting on a
combination of knowledge of medieval written sources, a study of the works
created by traditional masters (ustods) and an implementation of the achieve-
ments of Turkish, European and Russian-Soviet musicology.

After the dissolution of the Bukharan emirate and the foundation of the Bukharan
People’s Soviet Republic BPSR, Fitrat became the nazir (minister) of Education of the
BPSR and made energetic efforts to preserve and ‘‘nationalize’’ the once common
Bukharan heritage, the Bukharan Shashmaqom. He published transcriptions of this
repertoire without poetic texts (the vast majority of which were in the Persian-Tajik
language). The transcriptions were made by Victor Uspenskiy from prominent
Bukharan musicians, keepers of Bukharan Shashmaqom. It is interesting to note that
this work was started before the foundation of the Uzbek Soviet Socialist Republic,
evidence of Fitrat’s subtle political intuition. The Bukharan Shashmaqom appeared as
the result of the cooperation of musicians from different ethnic groups and
nationalities (Jewish, Iranians, Turkmens, etc.) alongside the contributions of Tajik
and Turkic (Uzbek) musicians. All of them lived in the urban polyethnic and
multicultural atmosphere of Bukhara where nationality was not strongly defined.
During the previous centuries the Shashmaqom existed as a supra-national cultural
phenomenon. After the 1920s the Bukharan Shashmaqom became a tool in the
political-national struggle between the new political and cultural elites in Soviet
Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.
Fitrat’s specifically ‘‘Uzbek way’’ manifested itself in his effort, on the one hand, to
establish a liaison of Uzbek national music with ancient Turkic roots and, on the
other hand, to present the works of some medieval Arabic and Persian language
theoreticians of music as part of the Uzbek heritage. For example, he names a well-
known Persian-language Bukharan scholar-musician Najm ad-Din Kawkabi (killed in
1531) who was in the service of an Uzbek ruler (Sheibanid Ubaidullah-khan) as ‘‘an
Uzbek scholar of music’’ (O‘zbek musiqiy olimi) (1927, 6). This tendency to integrate
common Central Asian and other musical heritage into the culture of Uzbekistan
would become fundamental to the work of subsequent decades and especially after
Uzbekistan gained independence. Meanwhile, Fitrat omits any mention of Tajiks or
Tajik music. The approach of Fitrat is comparable with the reformist activities of a
number of personalities in the countries of the Muslim world from the end of the
18th until the beginning of the 20th century, when national music schools were in a
Ethnomusicology Forum 173

Figure 2 Victor Uspenskiy with Bukharan Musicians. From Right to Left (Front Row):
Uspenskiy, Ata Jalal Nasirov, Ata Ghiyas Abdughani, Unidentified Person, (Second Row)
Damulla Halim Ibadov, Ma‘rufjan Tashpulatov. Bukhara, 1923.

stage of formation: Mikhail Meshaka (Mshaka, 1800 88) in Egypt, Ruhallo Haleki in
/

Iran, Rauf Ekta-bei (Yakta-bei) and Subhi Ezgi in Turkey, among others. Some of
their works were well known to Fitrat and he was guided by them (especially by those
of Rauf Ekta-bei) (Fitrat 1993, 37). Fitrat formulated a notion of Eastern or Eastern-
Muslim music (sharq Islom musiqasi) as a tradition, opposed to Western (European)
music. The very first phrase of his work on music states: ‘‘We have, as an opposition
to [the notion of] ‘Western music’, a notion [so‘z] of ‘Eastern music’ [sharq
musiqasi].’’ According to Fitrat, the system of maqamat served as common basis for
Eastern music. The activities of Fitrat in this direction coincided with the beginning
of a division into separate nations in Central Asia and the enhancing of nationalist
moods there (Djumaev 2000b, 222 3). /

Despite the withdrawal of Fitrat’s book from circulation in the mid-1930s and
his purging in 1938, the book played a key role in the development of a national
Uzbek ‘‘musical self-consciousness’’. It was well-known among specialists, its ideas
enjoyed fame and popularity, and it continued indirectly to influence musicological
development. Copies were kept in private collections by some musicologists,
musicians and composers (Viktor Uspenskiy, Victor Belyaev, Mutal Burkhanov,
Tolibjon Sadikov, Doni Zakirov, Faizulla Karomatov, Is’hoq Rajabov, Mahmud
Ahmedov and others), as well in the largest scholarly libraries of Uzbekistan (for
example, a copy was held at the Fundamental Library of the Academy of Sciences of
the Uzbek Soviet Socialist Republic, even when Fitrat himself was purged). A certain
ethical code came into existence: acknowledgement of Fitrat’s work turned into a
criterion of scholarly decency; for example, the reputed musician and composer-
bastakor 7 Doni Zakirov expressed his perplexity that Faizulla Karomatov had used
174 A. Djumaev

Figure 3 The Cover of Shest’ muzykal’nyh poem (maqom). Zapisannyh V.A. Uspenskim v
Bukhare (Six Musical Poems Written by V.A. Uspenskiy in Bukhara). Moscow, 1924.
the data on the tanbur from Fitrat’s book without making reference to the book itself
in his work on Uzbek instrumental music (Ahmedov 1995, 198 9; cf. Karomatov
/

1972b, 135 40). Fitrat was referred to by famous Russian musicologists in their
/

works and reports (most unpublished) even during the second half of the 1930 and in
the 1940s (Romanovskaya, Belyaev, Uspenskiy). In the 1960 and 1970s Fitrat’s name
and his book appeared briefly on the pages of musical-historical books and articles
written by Uzbek musicologists (Is’hoq Rajabov and others). But at the same time the
official attitude to Fitrat was very careful and suspicious. For this reason, his name
was removed by the official censor from published texts, not only in the 1930s and
1940s but even in the first half of the 1980s.8
Ethnomusicology Forum 175

Fitrat’s works were rehabilitated and acknowledged in full only after the declaration
of independence in Uzbekistan. In recent years Fitrat’s personality has achieved a
sanctified status. Some other representatives of the national intelligentsia purged in
the 1930s have also achieved the same destiny. In modern national literature
academics of this epoch are quite often labelled with the Muslim term shahid
(martyr), and special societies, museums and exhibitions have been established in
order to perpetuate their creative contributions.9 Any effort to consider the creativity
and scholarly heritage of Fitrat critically is now very much perceived in a negative
way, as an encroachment on ‘‘a national sacred object’’.10 In the period of
independence the scholarly and musical heritage of Fitrat has thus become not
only a subject for thorough study but, above all else, an object for ideological
manipulation in the activation of a national self-consciousness.
In the decades following the 1930s, and despite his personal repression, the
development of Uzbekistan’s musical culture followed the way paved by Fitrat’s work.
This became particularly obvious in the early 1970s, when some changes took shape
in Soviet cultural policy. For instance, the problems of national cultures were partially
attended to by the opening of the Eastern Music department in Tashkent State
Conservatoire (1972) and large musicological symposia were held on such issues as
the maqamat.
The practice of transcribing the essential monuments of the national music
heritage, such as the classical music of the maqoms (for example, the above-
mentioned Bukharan Shashmaqom), which was strongly developed later, is linked to
Fitrat. This fact, among others, permits us to say that notations of musical heritage,
transcribed from magnetic tape to notation or written down during the performance
itself, belong to the written heritage. Indeed, their ‘‘unsounded’’ (written) status is no
less important than the real music, which exists in the practice of musicians. The
understanding of a text as symbol of a fixed national heritage has been present in
Uzbekistan since the publication of the Bukharan Shashmaqom, initiated by Abdurauf
Fitrat. The publication itself symbolized the legitimatization of the Bukharan
Shashmaqom as an inseparable part of Uzbek national musical culture. During the
following years a five-volume collection of ‘‘Uzbek National Music’’ edited by Yunus
Rajabi (see below) gained almost the same quasi-sacred significance (O‘zbek khalq
musiqasi I, 1955; II, 1957; III, 1959; IV, 1958; V, 1959).
A prominent Uzbek philologist Is’hoq Rizkievich Rajabov (1927 82) became a
/

direct follower and successor of the line Fitrat started in musicology. Rajabov was
descended from a family of important Tashkent musicians (see Djumaev 1985, 1995;
Abdusamatov 1996; Yunusov 1997). His uncle, an academician named Yunus Rajabi,
had collected and transcribed the five-volume series on ‘‘Uzbek National Music’’,
which, in a subsequent edition by F.M. Karomatov, was renamed the Shashmaqom
(omitting reference to their Bukharan origin). This work represented a significant
contribution in the making of a national maqom. Is’hoq Rajabov was among the few
scholars who fearlessly referred to Fitrat’s works when the latter had not been
officially rehabilitated  see, for example, his fundamental study in Uzbek, Towards
/
176 A. Djumaev

the Issue of the Maqoms (Rajabov 1963, 6). Still his importance is not primarily in his
references to Fitrat, but above all in his active continuation of Fitrat’s earlier and now
interrupted conceptual line. The works of Rajabov, especially Towards the Issue of the
Maqoms, are also comparable to works of the above-mentioned reformers and fathers
of new musicological theories across the Muslim East, such as Meshaki in the Arab
world, Ruhallo Haleki and Mahdi Barkeshli in Iran and Rauf Ekta-bei in Turkey.
Is’hoq Rajabov and his uncle, the principal figures in the development of national
Uzbek musicology, attained a determining significance after Uzbekistan became
independent. Their significance was such that special lectures devoted to the

Figure 4 Is’hoq Rajabov, 1970s (Photo by Dmitry Mikhailov, Tashkent).


Ethnomusicology Forum 177

Rajabovs, ‘Rajabiykhonlik’, were among the first symbolic actions in the field of
musicology during the first years of independence. Upon opening one such event, the
musicologist To‘khtasyn Gafurbekov remarked: ‘‘As you know, in Uzbekistan
‘Pushkin lectures’, ‘Esenin lectures’ and, at our Institute for Arts Research, ‘Masson
lectures’ and ‘Belyaev lectures’ have been conducted until the present. Now let us give
thanks that we have the chance to hold ‘Navoi lectures’ and ‘Babur lectures’, ‘Yassavi
lectures’ and ‘Khazini lectures’’’ (1994, 4).
Nevertheless, the addition of new lecture series is not in itself enough to integrate
the wider Eastern heritage into the national music of Uzbekistan. The kind of
problem that results reveals itself vividly in a construction Gafurbekov employs to
suggest a coherent succession of musical enquiry from the 10th to the 20th centuries,
that is, ‘‘from Farabi to Fitrat’’ (1997, 19). Developing this idea, the author even
connects it directly to the gaining of independence (Gafurbekov 1998, 49).
As these remarks suggest, Fitrat and Rajabov have become symbols of Uzbek
national musicology and national musical culture. The opinions of both scholars are
currently held as being absolutely true, competent and final within each issue
considered by them. The unity of a huge cultural heritage within the national culture
is endorsed by their authority. At the present time, a stable conceptual trinity for
modern national musicology has been drawn up: treatises about music by medieval
authors (in different languages), the works of Abdurauf Fitrat and the works of Is’hoq
Rajabov.

National Melodies
The notion of ‘‘national melodies’’ (milliy ashulalar) emerged for the first time before
the Revolution. A famous poet-reformer and revolutionary activist named Hamza
Hakim-zade Niyazi (1889 1929) was probably the first to have introduced it into
/

social usage. He prepared and published a series of eight issues of poetic texts of
‘‘national melodies’’, which were already popular and widespread among the people
and in the sphere of musicians. The series was entitled National Poems for National
Melodies (Milliy ashulalar uchun milliy sherlar) (Niyazi 1915 19; see further
/

Karomatov 1959, 1972a). Still, Hamza did not intend to attribute the ‘‘national
melodies’’ to a concrete nation-state, as in today’s interpretation. The same principle
was kept as found in the above-mentioned bayaz collection of the poet Khislat, where
titles of melodies popular in Central Asia are listed for each new poem. The majority
of these are parts and sections of the Ferghana-Tashkent maqoms, as well as other
classical tunes.
Both editions, Hamza’s and Khislat’s, witness first and foremost that certain
emotional-aesthetic codifications of selected popular melodies existed in the
consciousness of the peoples of Central Asia. These melodies were preserved by
ear, and there was no need to record them in notation. It was sufficient simply to cite
their titles so that the reader-listener-musician could evoke an image of their sound
and style. Thus one can speak of the formation of a kind of ‘‘circle of listening’’ (by
178 A. Djumaev

analogy with a ‘‘circle of reading’’) among Central Asia’s urban population. A certain
Uzbek national model repertoire was arranged later on this basis.
The ‘‘circle of listening’’, then, consisted of a number of famous melodies which
had specific significance during the entire 20th century and became part of Uzbek
national music, and thereby inseparable components of the Uzbek national musical
identity. Most of these songs are permeated with profound moods, chiefly a sense of a
tragedy, separation and the unattainability of happiness; sadness, deep feeling and
compassion; and the feeling of being both doomed and reconciled with that destiny.
Their tight linkage with a national psychological personality type, a nostalgically
idealized former modus vivendi and events of national history gives a special nuance
to the act of listening to these songs in present-day Uzbekistan.
This national culture of listening has not yet been thoroughly explored by
musicologists, but examples of its operation are found in the creative works of Uzbek
poets and writers of the first half of the 20th century. As mentioned above, Abdulla
Qodiriy and his historical novel O‘tgan kunlar (Past Days) are of particular
importance among them. Qodiriy’s book displays music as a natural part of the
spiritual life of individuals in the context of a traditional society, where it appears as
the symbol of a national spirit. Uzbek intelligentsia of elder and middle generations
associate this work with a deep philosophic-poetic understanding of Uzbek national
music.11 The novel is abundant with subtle observations on music and its place in life
of the people, but one of its key episodes charting the deep emotional feelings of the
main character Otabek is titled Navo kui (Navo melody) (see Qodiriy 1980, 205 8). /

The melody called ‘‘Navo’’, considered to be one of the most beautiful and expressive
in the repertory, was chosen as the leading melody for the episode. It is necessary to
note that Navo is a polysemantic term used with various meanings in traditional
Central Asian musical practice (both Persian-Tajik and Turkic). In general it has a
common meaning, covering all ordinary instrumental or vocal melodies. In the
system of classical music (maqamat) Navo is known as one mode in the old modal
system (parda, maqam). Navo is also the third in the cycle of the six Bukharan
maqoms (Shashmaqom). Musicians pay special attention to this maqom, and
consider it the most beautiful and expressive. Although Qodiriy names Navo as a
‘kuu’ (Uzbek-Turkic: melody) one may suppose that he means the Maqom Navo.
This episode in the novel renders a profound and complete consonance between the
state of the hero and the music. Such correspondences between the character of
maqom and the emotions of the listeners were described in Central Asian treatises of
the Middle Ages on music (written in Persian).
Drawing on examples like this in the Uzbek literary tradition, including
memoirs,12 the studies of musicologists and other sources, one might try to name
the principal tunes that form the fundamental layer of a national musical identity.
First of all, the following melodies (in both instrumental and vocal-instrumental
formats) should be mentioned: Tanovar, Munojot, Navo, Ushshoq, Chuli Iroq, Segoh,
Ajam, Nasrulloi, Chorgoh, Eshvoi, Qaro quzum, Bayot, Gir’ya, Q‘oshchinor and
Qalandar. Not only are the tunes of these melodies known to connoisseurs of
Ethnomusicology Forum 179

national music, but also the associations they bear are believed to be fitting to the
national tradition. Apart from the most famous melodies, other aspects of the
sound world of Uzbek music also operate as symbols of a national identity. These
include the sounds of various national instruments, above all the tanbur, with its
system of melodic ornamentations, rhythmic formulas (known as usuls) and other
characteristics.
The melodic and rhythmic richness of the repertoire enabled musicians to build a
coherent sonic world which has achieved wide recognition as national heritage in the
years following independence, as activists sought to construct a national musical
identity. Following on from this project, the national press and other official
institutions have in recent years held discussions on the protection of national music
(here meaning mostly light music and pop music) against alien (foreign) influence
(including the imitation of Turkish, Indian, Arab or other national traditions). In this
process, some performers (with female singers prominent among them) have been
sharply criticized. One may suppose that female singers take a special place in
contemporary Uzbek pop music, and their influence on the young audience is much
stronger than that of their male counterparts.

Other Sources of Identity


Based on the sources already referred to, as well as on personal observation over some
decades, it is clear that Uzbek musicology is heading towards the restoration of
traditional contexts of music culture. During the years since 1991, the quantity of
material (articles, studies) that actively discusses the issue of national culture has
grown markedly. Publications dedicated to issues of national ideology, national
statehood, nation building and music are worth special mention (for example, Olim
1997; Abdullaev 2002; Yunusov 2002). Musical art has occupied a very important
place in the resumed process of the construction of the Uzbek nation. The following
themes can be distinguished in this musicological work and surrounding discourses:
. the search for a proper national musical identity
. the question of how to manage the return of Islamic cultural values and
components of religion as symbols of national identity, a matter which impacts
on aesthetic perception in traditional music as well as on the creativity of
composers and the stance of musicologists
. the increasing use in modern creative works of imagery from national
mythology, and images and events of the historic past, whether ancient,
medieval or recent
. the restoration of the lost sacred status of traditional music, especially that of
the maqomat
. research into the reconstruction and restoration of the traditional semantic
basis of music making
. the broader study and revision of musical terminology
180 A. Djumaev

. the integration of the common cultural musical heritage of Central Asia, the
Middle East and Iran into the process of nation building.

I shall briefly overview just one of these issues, which is the question of post-
independence attitudes towards Islamic cultural values as an essential element of
national artistic culture. An appeal to Islam is taking place in all layers and spheres of
Uzbek musical culture, whether in the creativity of modern composers (who address
the sacred sound and textual elements of Islam), in the sphere of traditional music
(which is seeing renewed performance in religious and other ritual contexts) and in
music scholarship, where the partial return of religious-aesthetic instructions has
stimulated efforts to unite academic and religious knowledge. As a rule the use of
religious symbolism is interpreted in two ways: as a sign of belonging to national
culture and as a suitable and fresh expressive and philosophical ‘‘resource’’. Different
approaches to Islamic sacred material, from direct citation of the azan and surahs of
the Koran to their profound metaphoric re-thinking, can be found in the works of
contemporary composers. The eldest of Uzbekistan’s composers, Mutal Burkhanov
(1916 2002), merits mention as the first and most consistent of several who have
/

incorporated Islamic elements in their music. Burkhanov was the first to introduce
reading of a Koranic surah in his opera Alisher Navoiy. Another of his compositions,
Requiem: Abadiy khotira (1997), begins with a choral singing of the azan and ends
with Farukh Zakirov’s reading of a surah. Elements of the Koran, the azan as well as
rich Sufi heritage have been widely employed by Mystafa Bafoev, Dilorom
Saidaminova and other modern Uzbek composers as well.
In the mid-1990s, scholarly studies were revitalized in Uzbekistan, and efforts were
made to integrate elements of religious consciousness into musicological study, to
explain secular science as part of religious knowledge, and to interpret traditional
musical-historic phenomena (especially the art of the maqomat) in terms of sacred
and divine revelation and/or the doctrines of Sufism. All these attempts are based
on an extremely nationalistic, but hidden motivation. The musicologists Oqil
Ibraghimov and Tokhtasin Gafurbekov have proved to be especially consistent in
this line. The endeavour to interweave religious and scholarly knowledge may be
observed in particular in references in some editions regarding the dependence of
all knowledge on the will of Allah, and the public exhibition (in the foyer of the
Research Institute of the Arts, and according to the Director’s order) of hadith
(tradition; accounts of what the Prophet said or did), which explain the meaning of
scholarship from the point of view of religion: ‘‘There are two types of knowledge, the
one, in the heart, is useful, whereas the other one is on the tongue and its harm shall
be demonstrated in the presence of the Creator’’ (Ilm ikki hildir, biri qalbdagi ilm
bo‘lib, u foidalidir. Ikkinchi tildagi ilm bo‘lib, u Tangri huzurida banda zarariga dalil
bo‘ladi.
The material reviewed above provides evidence that the musical culture of
Uzbekistan has entered a new stage in its development, one which entails acts of
restoration and a search for a national musical identity. Although there are some
Ethnomusicology Forum 181

continuities with preceding experience, this new phase presents a complex and
polysemantic synthesis of different cultural accumulations with an emphasis
given to what are taken as authentic indigenous traditions. One of the essential
principles of the formation of a national musical identity is the integration and
re-thinking of cultural systems and achievements of the preceding epochs, including
a cultural model of the collapsed international community. Tearing away and
adaptation, ‘‘purification’’ and re-thinking remain, as ever, constants within this
intricate process.

Notes
[1] For an account of cultural policy and the new situation in musical culture in Uzbekistan and
Tajikistan at the beginning of the independence period, see Levin (1993, 1996) and During
(1998, 103 /46; 2001).
[2] ‘‘Intonation’’ is a theoretical notion which was developed by the Soviet musicologists. Its
founder was the prominent Soviet Russian scholar academician Boris Asafiev. Usually it
includes the initial parts of melody / groups of sounds, rhythm or other elements /
possessed of certain semantic meanings. Musical intonation can be connected with the
lines of movement of human speech.
[3] Uzbek and Persian-Tajik are transcribed here in accordance with the rules used in the
national writing in contemporary Uzbekistan with some exceptions (modern Uzbek ‘‘x’’ we
transcribe as ‘kh’’, ‘‘g‘’’ as ‘‘gh’’.
[4] The key and earliest work devoted to this matter in Central Asia was Fitrat’s book Munazara
(Dispute) written in 1909 in Bukhara and published in Istanbul in 1911 (see Fitrat 2000,
46 /98).
[5] For example, Evsei A. Cherniavskiy, a Turkestani amateur musician and cultural activist,
wrote: ‘‘The people of Turkestan have a certain high culture of their own but as a heritage
from the past’’ (1922, 5). The same idea was also developed by other authors at this time, and
several publications arose devoted to different kinds of heritage in Uzbekistan, such as
Adabiy meros (Literary Heritage).
[6] Contrary to the present dominant opinion in national literature, I hold the view that the
heritage of the past was widely studied in the Soviet period. Such study was very often
masked by an official demonstration of ideological loyalty: almost all publications on
heritage began with reference to the works of Marx and Lenin, though the material under
publication might lie far from socialism. Heritage was viewed in a double way in this period:
as both the material for building and developing a new musical culture and as part of
national culture itself.
[7] Bastakor (in Persian: basta / to tie; kor / work, job, etc) / this term was introduced in the
Soviet period, and refers to composers who create vocal and instrumental pieces (songs,
musical dramas, etc.) in traditional style (in general monodic).
[8] Tokhtasyn Gafurbekov writes about it as follows: ‘‘The article ‘Zafarnoma’ written by
academician I. Muminov and already type-set was excluded from vol. IV of the O‘zbek Sovet
entsiklopediyasi (1973), as well as the chapter on Abdurauf Fitrat in the book Muzykalnaia
kritika v Uzbekistane (1984)’’ (1997, 22).
[9] See, for instance, an article devoted to the opening of the shahids’ museum in Tashkent by
Abdullaev (2002).
[10] See, for example, Nazarov (1997, 5) for serious objections to the interpretation of Fitrat’s
musical ideas and activity made in my article (Djumaev 1997).
182 A. Djumaev

[11] The prominent Uzbek dutar player Abdurahim Hamidov told me that he considers Qodiriy’s
novel the best writing about Uzbek music ever written (personal communication, 2001).
[12] Among memoirs, see, for example, Qodiriy (1974, 98, 99), Yuldashbaeva (1972, 92) and
Saidnosirova (1994, 121).

References
Abdullaev, M. 2002. Shahidlar yodi. O‘zbekiston adabiyoti va san’ati 37(3670): 2.
Abdullaev, Rustam. 2002. Milliy istiqlol va musiqa (Kompozitor bilan suhbat). In Musiqa ijodiyoti
masalalari: Maqolalar to‘plami , II kitob, edited by Rustam Abdullaev et al. Tashkent: ‘‘Yangi
asr avlodi’’, pp. 4 /11.
Abdusamatov, Malik. 1996. Rajabov Is’hoq. In Uzbekiston sharqshunoslari: Biografik ocherk , edited
by Abdusamatov Malik. Tashkent: Qomuslar Bosh tahririyati, pp. 125 /6.
Ahmedov, Mahmud. 1995. Doni Zokirov: Khayoti va ijodi . Tashkent: Ibn Sino nomidagi nashriyot-
matbaa birlashmasi.
Anon. 1914. Qalandar, maddoh (voiz), luli va gadoilarimiz, yoki musulmonlik nomini bulgatguchi
beor tanballarimiz. Aina 34: 806.
Bukhari, Niyaz Rajab-Zade. 1914. Bukhoroi sharif ilm va maarifat joi erdi. Aina 33: 784 /5.
Bukhoro Qozi Kaloni. 1908. Ad-Din va-l-Adab 3(7): 208. Qazan: Lito-Tipografiia I.N. Haritonova.
Cherniavskiy, Evsei. 1922. Podhod k tuzemnomu iskusstvu. Iskusstvo i zhizn’: Periodicheskiy zhurnal
hudozhestvennoi mysli i teatra 1: 5.
Djumaev, Alexander. 1985. O zadachah muzykal’nogo vostokovedeniia Uzbekistana po izycheniyu
srednevekovyh traktatov o muzyke. Obschestvennye nauki v Uzbekistane 3: 53 /4.
*/*/*/. 1993. Power structures, culture policy, and traditional music in Soviet Central Asia.
Yearbook for Traditional Music 25: 43 /50.
*/*/*/. 1995. Rajabov Is’haq Riskievich. In Biobibliograficheskiy slovar’ otechestvennyh vostokovedov
s 1917 g. 2-e izdanie, pererabotannoe i dopolnennoe, v dvuh knigah , edited by S.D. Miliband.
Moscow: Izdatel’stvo ‘‘Nauka’’, pp. 292 /3.
*/*/*/. 1997. Abdurauf Fitrat i ego sovremenniki na ‘‘muzykal’nom fronte’’ Uzbekistana (20 /30-e
gody). Tsentral’naia Aziia 1(7): 104 /9, 2(8): 111 /15, 3(9): 118 /23.
*/*/*/. 2000a. Otkryvaia ‘‘chernyi iaschik’’ proshlogo. Muzykalnaia akademiia 1: 89 /103.
*/*/*/. 2000b. Russkoe muzykoznanie v Uzbekistane: idei i litsa (1920 /30-e gody). In Rossiia-
Uzbekistan: v proshlom i nastoiaschem: Lyudi. Sobytiia. Razmyshleniia , Sbornik statei, edited
by Alexander Djumaev et al. Moscow: Armada i ‘‘Izdatel’stvo Al’fa-kniga’’, pp. 214 /43.
During, Jean. 1998. Musiques d’Asie Centrale: l’esprit d’une tradition . Arles: Cité de la Musique/Actes
Sud.
*/*/*/. 2001. Musique et musicians d’Ouzbekistan: Tous les styles, tous les genres. Missives .
Numero special: Images culturelles de l’Asie centrale contemporaine: 62 /73.
Fitrat, Abdurauf. 1927. O‘zbek klassik musiqasi va uning tarikhi . Samarkand-Tashkent.
*/*/*/. 1928. O‘zbek adabiyoti namunalari . I. Samarkand-Tashkent: Uzbekskoe Gosudarstvennoe
Izdatel’stvo.
*/*/*/. 1993. O‘zbek klassik musiqasi va uning tarikhi , edited by Karimbek Hasan. Tashkent:
O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Fanlar akademiiasi ‘‘Fan’’ nashriyoti (Cyrillic edition of Fitrat
1927).
*/*/*/. 2000. Munazara. In Abdurauf Fitrat: Tanlangan asarlar, 1: 46 /98, edited by Hamidulla
Boltabaev. Tashkent: Ma‘naviyat.
Gafurbekov, To‘khtasyn. 1994. Debocha. In Rajabiykhonlik: Ilmiy-amaliy anjuman materiallari .
Tashkent: O‘zbekiston Respublikasi madaniyat vazirligi, pp. 4 /9.
Ethnomusicology Forum 183

*/*/*/. 1997. Iskusstvoznanie Uzbekistana (obreteniia, poteri, perspektivy). In Problemy


iskusstvoznaniia Uzbekistana , Sbornik statei, edited by To‘khtasyn Gafurbekov et al. Tashkent:
Izdatel’stvo ‘‘Fan’’ Akademii nauk Respubliki Uzbekistan, pp. 17 /23.
*/*/*/. 1998. San’atshunoslik ilmiy-tadqiqot Instituti mustakillik yillarida. In San’atshunoslik
masalalari: Ilmiy makolalar tuplami , edited by Oqil Ibrohimov et al. Tashkent: Redaktsiia
jurnala ‘‘San’at’’, pp. 36 /42.
Ghairati. 1926. Tanburchi qizga. Yangi yo‘l 5: 9.
Gurevich, Alexander. 1934. O polozhenii na istoricheskom fronte Srednei Azii. In Revolyutsiia i
kultura v Srednei Azii: Sbornik pervyi . Tashkent: Sredneaziatskiy nauchno-issledovatelskiy:
Institut marksizma-leninizma pri Sredazbyuro TsK VKP(b), pp. 4 /13.
Karomatov, Faizulla. 1959. Hamza Hakim-zade Niyazi i uzbekskaia sovetskaya muzyka . Tashkent:
Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo hodojestvennoi literatury UzSSR.
*/*/*/. 1972a. Pesennoe tvorchestvo Hamzy. In Istoria uzbekskoi sovetskoi muzyki I (1917 /1945) ,
edited by Tamara Vyzgo et al. Tashkent: Izdatel’stvo literatury i iskusstva imeni Gafura
Guliama, pp. 113 /26.
*/*/*/. 1972b. Uzbekskaia instrumental’naia muzyka (nasledie) . Tashkent: Izdatel’stvo literatury i
iskusstva imeni Gafura Guliama.
Khalid, Adeeb. 1998. The politics of Muslim cultural reform: Jadidism in Central Asia . Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Khislat. 1912. Armughoni Khislat . Tashkent: Litografiia Arifdjanova.
Khodjaev, Faizulla. 1926. Bukhoro inqilobining tarikhi materiallar. Samarkand: Uzbekiston davlat
nashriyoti.
Levin, Theodore. 1993. The reterritorialization of culture in the new Central Asian states: a report
from Uzbekistan. Yearbook for Traditional Music 25: 51 /9.
*/*/*/. 1996. The hundred thousand fools of God: Musical travels in Central Asia (and Queens,
New York) . Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Nazarov, Abdumannon. 1997. Sohta muamma kimga zarur? Yoki ilmiylikdan yirok ba’zi ‘‘ilmiy’’
kashfiyotlar hususida. O’zbekiston adabiyoti va san’ati 24(3409): 5.
Niyazi, Hamza Hakim-zade. 1915 /19. Milliy ashulalar uchun milliy sherlar majmuasi . Kokand.
Olim, Sultonmurod. 1997. Musiqiy san’at va milliylik. O‘zbekiston adabiyoti va san’ati 34 /5.
O‘zbek khalq musiqasi, 1955. Sobral i zapisal Yunus Rajabi, pod redaktsiei Il’iasa Akbarova , Tom I.
Tashkent: Gosudarstvennoe Izdatelstvo Uzbekskoi SSR.
*/*/*/. 1957. Sobral i zapisal Yunus Rajabi, pod redaktsiei Il’iasa Akbarova . Tom II. Tashkent:
Gosudarstvennoe Izdatelstvo Uzbekskoi SSR.
*/*/*/. 1959. Sobral i zapisal Yunus Rajabi, pod redaktsiei Il’iasa Akbarova . Tom III. Tashkent:
Gosudarstvennoe Izdatelstvo hudozhestvennoi literatury UzSSR.
*/*/*/. 1958. Sobral i zapisal Yunus Rajabi, pod redaktsiei Il’iasa Akbarova . Tom IV. Tashkent:
Gosudarstvennoe Izdatelstvo Uzbekskoi SSR.
*/*/*/. 1959. Sobral i zapisal Yunus Rajabi, pod redaktsiei Il’iasa Akbarova . Tom V. Bukharskie
makomy. Tashkent: Gosudarstvennoe Izdatelstvo Uzbekskoi SSR.
Qodiriy, Abdulla. 1980 [1925 /6]. O‘tgan kunlar: Tarikhiy roman . Tashkent: Ukituvchi.
Qodiriy, Habibullo. 1974. Otam haqida: Khotiralar. Tashkent: Gafur Gulom nomidagi adabiyot va
san’at nashriyoti.
Rajabov, Is’hoq. 1963. Maqomlar masalasiga doir. Tashkent: O‘zSSR davlat badiiy adabiyot
nashriyoti.
Saidnosirova, Zarifa. 1994. Oibegim mening: Khotiralar. Tashkent: ‘‘Sharq’’ nashriyot-matbaa
kontserning bosh tahririiati.
Sami‘. 1914. Munozare-yi qadimi bo jadidi. Aina 34: 820 /1.
Sartori, Paolo. 2003. Altro che seta: Corano e progresso in Turkestan (1865 /1917) . Pasian di Prato
(UD): Campanotto Editore.
184 A. Djumaev

Uspenskiy, Viktor A. 1927. Klassicheskaia muzyka uzbekov (K materialam po issledovaniyu


klassicheskih muzykal’nyh poem-makomov). Sovetskiy Uzbekistan : 305 /15.
Yuldashbaeva, Fatima. 1972. Moia sud’ba: Rasskazy o zhizni . Tashkent: Izdatel’stvo TSK LKSM
Uzbekistana ‘‘Yosh Gvardiya’’.
Yunusov, Ravshan. 1997. Maqom allomasi: Ustoz Is’hoq Rajabov khotirlab. O‘zbekiston adabiyoti va
san’ati 9(3394): 5.
*/*/*/. 2002. Istiqlol mafkurasi va musiqiy jarayon. In Musiqa ijodiyoti masalalari: Maqolalar
to‘plami , II kitob, edited by Rustam Abdullaev et al. Tashkent: Yangi asr avlodi, pp. 12 /22.