A talented representative of Russian Oriental studies, who made a significant contribution to the creation of its authority in the world community of scientists, Alexander Andreevich Guber was a historian and sociologist of an encyclopedic nature. He belonged to the galaxy of researchers whose works and activities determined the main milestones in the development of modern Russian Oriental science.

The future father, the founder of many directions in Russian Oriental studies, Academician of the USSR Academy of Sciences and Honorary Doctor of Cambridge University, was born on April 1, 1902 in Kamenka, Kiev province, in the family of an agronomist. The Hubers are descended from the Ostsee barons, who were granted Russian nobility in the 18th century - the corresponding charter was signed by Catherine II and Paul I, which in itself is quite rare. The Gubers were among the elite of the Russian intelligentsia. The ancestor of Alexander Andreevich-a contemporary of Alexander Pushkin-was a fairly well-known poet. In the personal library of A. A. Huber, a voluminous three-volume book of poems by his great-great-grandfather was kept. Many generations of this family were engaged in intellectual work; it was customary to know at least a few European languages. The teacher managed to finish a classical gymnasium, and then worked as a worker in the state agricultural enterprise, which was run by his father. So he had reason to write that he began his life as a worker. In 1925. A. A. Guber graduated from the Moscow Institute of Oriental Studies, where he majored in the language and history of Iran and India. Until 1937, he worked at the Communist University of the Workers of the East (KUTV), where he developed as a broad-based orientalist.

The name of A. A. Huber is inextricably linked with the training of orientalists at Moscow State University. For almost 35 years, he was a professor and head of departments at the Faculty of History, and then at the Institute of Oriental Languages (now ISAA) at Moscow State University, in the creation of which he took an active part. He was also a professor at other universities.

A. A. Guber worked at the Academy of Sciences since 1938. In 1953, he was elected a corresponding member, and in 1966-a full member of the USSR Academy of Sciences; he was Deputy Director of the Pacific Institute and the Institute of Oriental Studies (the latter he headed in 1953-1956). Since 1957, A. A. Guber-Deputy Academician-Secretary of the Department of Historical Sciences USSR Academy of Sciences, Chairman of the National Committee of Historians.

The image of a scientist consists of three components: the identity of the individual, works and students. Everyone who knew him agreed that the Teacher was a charming, noble and sympathetic person, a polymath who spoke a language that was amazing in beauty and accuracy. And the manner of presentation was such that the audience felt like participants in the events.

page 116

He had a sharp, quick reaction, and a quick wit. It was a trait of his character and never left him. He was witty, opening large international conferences and chairing meetings of a very small staff of the Department of History of the Far East and Southeast Asia at Moscow State University, in conversations with friends and students. The beauty of his jokes was that in each of them, along with a completely paradoxical combination of concepts, there was always a subtle and precise thought. It is also very significant that the sharpest remarks did not give rise to personal resentment.

The Teacher's life experience has developed the habit of keeping his distance. For a certain amount of time, he took a closer look at the people around him. But when he was convinced that you had positive qualities, you really enjoyed communicating with the smartest, most versatile and kind person. He loved science and the people involved in it.

A. A. Huber created modern Russian Oriental studies in collaboration with such outstanding people as E. M. Zhukov, A. F. Miller, I. M. Reisner, N. A. Smirnov, E. L. Steinberg and other orientalists of the older generation. But Japonists, Sinologists, Arabists, Indologists, Iranists, and Turkologists drew on the rich traditions and experience of Russian Oriental studies. It fell to the lot of A. A. Huber to be the first to start researching the countries of Southeast Asia, to become the founder of the national school of their study. The Teacher did not immediately come to focus on the Southeast Asian countries. He began his scientific activity together with his fellow students at the Institute of Oriental Studies with the study of South Asian problems.

A. A. Huber's name first appeared in print in 1925. Together with his fellow student at the Institute of Oriental Studies A. Stusser, he translated the book "The Situation of Workers in Indonesian Industry"by G. M. Brafton from English. The first self-written and published work was a review of the voluminous work of A. Mayhew "Enlightenment in India" 1 . Even in this one-page opus, a trait inherent in our hero is revealed - a respectful attitude to the work done by the author: the review notes the value of the collected material, especially with regard to the formation of the education system (curricula, etc.).

The first independent article by A. A. Huber appeared in 1928 in the journal "Revolutionary East" 2 . First of all, attention is drawn to the thoroughness of the article. To write it, A. A. Huber studied numerous official documents, among them-a three-volume report on the state of the population of Java and Madura, a report on the economic situation on the islands, reports on the situation of local workers in the metalworking industry of Sumatra, statistical annual reports on the Netherlands India. For an article published in Moscow in those years, it was rather unusual to say that the influx of foreign capital encouraged by the metropolis contributed to the development of both agricultural and industrial production .3 It also noted that there were industrial enterprises in the colony, "equipped with the latest technology."

In the same article, another characteristic feature of the Teacher's work appears - emphasizing the role of the intelligentsia in the social and political life of the peoples of Asian countries. A. A. Guber used the "fig leaf" - the term "intelligent proletariat", including native officials and employees of state and private enterprises.

In the Teacher's legacy, there is also an article written on the basis of direct field research. In the summer of 1929, as an employee of KUTVa dealing with the problem of India and Afghanistan, he was sent to the Kushkinsky district to study the Afghan tribes that migrated to the territory of the USSR. The trip resulted in the article "On the border tribes of the Kushkinsky district" 4 , which focuses on the following topics:

page 117

the eternal problem of "tradition and continuity"is considered. In particular, attention was drawn to the fact that the adoption of certain forms of modern life does not mean abandoning the traditional way of life. For example, modern forms of medical care were accepted as not leading to undermining the foundations, and the modern education system was rejected. A. A. Guber warned against revaluing the modernization of everyday life and the mentality of people being transferred to sedentarism.

In the late 1920s, the Teacher faced the problem of scientific self-determination. Such well-known researchers and teachers as I. M. Reisner, A. M. Dyakov, V. V. Balabushevich worked together with him in India and Afghanistan. He begins to write a large monograph " Indonesia. Socio-economic essays". The publication of the capital work in 1932 (378 pages) is preceded by a series of articles that reveal various aspects of the life of this Dutch colony. Among them: "Agriculture of Indonesia "(1928)," Foreign capital in Indonesia "(1929)," Class stratification of the peasantry in Indonesia " (1930) and others. The monograph was the result of a study of everything published on the history and economy of the Netherlands Indies, which was in the book repositories of both capitals. Reference publications, literature and periodicals in Russian, Dutch, English, German and French made up the base of the monograph. The book was written at a certain time, and this is evident in the text itself and its structure. However, A. A. Huber's monograph differs from the typical "product of the epoch" in several ways.

First, it is a respectful attitude to the work of their foreign-language predecessors. The fact that they did not stand on the ideological positions that were loudly declared in Russia at that time did not diminish, in the researcher's opinion, their contribution to the study of various aspects of Indonesian life.

Secondly, the analysis of the impact of subjective factors on determining the nature and course of development of public institutions, on the development of internal processes on the islands that make up present-day Indonesia, was influenced by Indians, Chinese and Arabs, Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam, and later by the Portuguese, Dutch and English.

Third, A. A. Guber drew attention to the fact that not only social conditions determine the nature of political development and the structure of states. In an era when all ideas were defined by the articles " on the foundations of Leninism "and" on questions of Leninism", our hero at the very beginning of his monograph argued that one of the important reasons that prevented the long-term existence of a centralized state in Java was the lack of a major waterway and a unified irrigation system.

Fourth, in the specific conditions of the country under study - the influence of more developed neighbors. Various ethnic communities have their own social niches: the autochthonous population is almost exclusively associated with the patriarchal rural community, and everything related to commodity-money relations and a non-ruralistic way of life ended up in the hands of Arabs, as well as immigrants from China and India.

Fifthly: the mother countries, in particular Holland, being in Europe carriers of the most advanced social, economic and political relations for their time, in the colonies acted from retrograde protective positions. Holland, both during the era of the East India Company (OIC) and after its liquidation, maintained and maintained patriarchal relations in its colonies until 1870, including the most archaic ones. I do not know how acceptable the term "deceleration"used in A. A. Huber's monograph in relation to the results of government in the OIC Islands is today. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say "conservation". But this is already now, from the point of view of the border of the XX and XXI centuries, when it comes to the realization that patriarchal structures are inside the state.-

page 118

There are no external incentives to go beyond the existing one. The surplus product produced in them is very insignificant, and the dominant type of mentality creates insurmountable barriers to its productive use.

It seems that even at the beginning of the XXI century, the section of the book "The main stages of transformation of Indonesia into a colony of Dutch imperialism" retained its significance. It not only analyzes the process of the emergence and development of the Dutch colonial apparatus, but also traces the breakdown and restructuring of relations in the economy and in society. For the people of the 20s and 30s of the last century, it was a prescient statement that in the tropics the nature of land ownership and relations between "large landowners" and direct producers are not similar to European models: "It is extremely characteristic of Java that even large landowners' land ownership usually consists of small and minute parcels, often scattered in various villages and even districts"5 . Students of A. A. Huber already in the 1970s came to the conclusion that in the tropics, the "landowner" acted as an organizer of the development of new lands and as a representative of the interests of the community outside its borders. It was the performance of these functions that gave him the right to "property" - a part of the newly developed land.

Studying the socio-economic processes in Indonesia, A. A. Huber revealed the specifically colonial nature of the development of capitalist relations in it, the subordination of pre-capitalist forms of production to the needs of monopolistic capital, which, together with the growth of the tax burden, led to the predominance of the most severe forms of exploitation of the population. Revealing the essence of the ongoing processes, he wrote: "It is just as difficult to establish the relationship between the forced conversion of native agriculture to the production of export cash crops and the commodity production resulting from the processes of capitalist evolution as it is to separate these processes of capitalist development from the entire system of colonial oppression that determines their ugly colonial forms." 6

The main part of the monograph "Indonesia - a colony of Dutch imperialism" remains of interest to anyone interested in the history of the early 20th century, especially in the relations between the mother country and the colony. From the perspective of today, of course, it was necessary to pay more attention to the transition of the Netherlands to an "ethical course" in the administration of the colony. But at the time of writing the monograph, this was not possible, because it would have meant recognizing that positive changes are not always the result of a sharp antagonistic confrontation. But even without this, the section has a lot of interesting things that have retained their significance. Among them: the creation of an appropriate investment climate for attracting capital; the statement that the influx of European capital and the sharp jump in the development of the Indonesian economy was prepared by the creation of transport and information infrastructure, etc.

The researcher again returns to the concept of "patriarchy-modernization" and gives a lot of examples of how involvement in commodity-money relations does not become obsolete, but only modifies traditional relations and mentality. In general, it seems that A. B. Belenky, G. I. Levinson and V. A. Tyurin were absolutely right when they claimed that even 40 years after the publication of the monograph "Indonesia-socio-economic Essays" remained a storehouse of knowledge, a real scientific encyclopedia on Indonesia. 7

A few more comments about the Teacher's first monograph. It was necessary to have great courage and high professionalism to claim in those years that in the pre-imperialist era in Indonesia there was no social, economic and even linguistic community, and, consequently, there was no social and cultural unity.

page 119

there could be no national liberation struggle. Only in time did "the prerequisites for the gradual unification of isolated and spontaneous demonstrations into a mass national liberation movement" become established . From today's perspective, the Teacher's comments about the first mass Indonesian organizations are very important. He writes that they were based on the opposition "we/they". The first unifying concept was Islam, and the first mass organization was Sarekat Islam (Union of Islam), which initially opposed not so much the metropolis as its Chinese retail competitors.

The most significant political figure of the second decade of the twentieth century in Java, under whose leadership the Union ceased to represent the interests of only Islamic merchants and set out to unite all Muslims, was Umar Said Chok-roaminoto. His surname indicates an aristocratic, according to local concepts, origin. Of course, in the spirit of the times, they talk about the radical petty bourgeoisie, class differentiation, etc., etc., but the unbiased reader understood that the main representative of the interests of the "radical petty bourgeoisie" was the Javanese Priyas - the social elite of traditional society.

Each time has its own rules of the game. The rules required excessive attention and ratings to the activities of Marxist and workers ' organizations, and the rules were not violated. Therefore, the book gives a high assessment of the emergence of the Social Democratic Union in Indonesia in 1914. At the same time, it is reported that it was an organization of Dutch Social Democrats expelled from the metropolis for revolutionary activities, who set themselves the task of attracting trade union activists from the local population to the ranks of the union. When it was successful. The Social Democratic Union ceased to exist and the Communist Party of Indonesia emerged, about which the study says all the necessary words at that time. But at the same time, A. A. Huber reports that the largest trade unions whose leaders were headed by the CPI were the unions of pawnshop employees and employees of railway and tram lines. That is, in the colonies, the emergence of communist parties usually precedes the political maturation of the working class - with all the ensuing consequences. A. A. Huber showed the unsuccessful nature of the attempt of the first independent action of the CPI (what is called the 1926-1927 uprising in Java and Sumatra). No significant preparatory work was carried out, and the direct participants had little understanding of conspiracy and even less of discipline. The researcher is absolutely right when he qualifies the reaction of the colonial authorities to the "1926-27 uprising in Java and Sumatra" as inadequate, too harsh. As a contemporary who knew many of the participants in the events, he could not help but feel and grieve over the mass repressions in Indonesia. It seems that the American researcher of these events, Ruth McVay, is right when she claims that many more people were subjected to repression than the CPI had members.

The book was well received by colleagues, if only because it was the first major work on Indonesia. There were no predecessors in the fatherland, but there were no rival friends. The monograph received a positive review "at the top"; in 1937 it was published in Holland. True, it now had two authors. The first was the name of the Dutch communist O. J. Rutgers, who "took part in the translation, editing and writing of some sections" 9, and the second was A. A. Huber. Familiarity with the monograph proves that it is a translation, often verbatim, of the Russian edition of 1932. Instead of "Socio-economic essays" - "History from ancient times to the beginning of the XX century". The translation reduced the volume of the book by about half. It was published in the left-wing publishing house "Pegasus". The publishing house, when recommending the book, emphasized that the authors are the basis of the isto-

page 120

The book itself has been hailed as a bold attempt to present the history of the Malay Archipelago from a Marxist perspective.

Personally for A. A. Huber the book "Indonesia". Socio-economic essays " marked the beginning of the turn of scientific interests from direct reaction to current events towards the study of history. From the mid-1930s to the early 1970s, historical research became predominant in his work. But he was formed as a historian of the Moscow school, which means that he paid close attention to issues of economic development and social structure. Both were closely linked to the problems of civil history and political life. In his works, the breath of contemporary reality is always felt. Even historical writings were reactions to current events.

Indonesia and its study occupied a big place in the Teacher's life. He has written more than 40 books, pamphlets, articles, chapters in textbooks and sections in monographs on the history, political and socio-economic problems of a distant island country. But he always stayed true to his choice - the choice of a pioneer. In 1930, A. A. Huber published on Indochina, and in 1932-on the Philippines, which marked the beginning of a systematic study of the entire region of Southeast Asia in our country. Although his range of interests expanded continuously throughout his life, encompassing new countries and new problems, until the end of his life, he considered himself primarily a specialist in Southeast Asia. In this field of Oriental studies, Alexander Andreevich not only made a huge contribution with his writings, he created a university school.

Indonesia is the Teacher's first love. The Philippines, on the other hand, has occupied a place next to her for the rest of his life. In any case, Indonesia and the Philippines are the dominant research topics, other countries in the East and Latin America he deals with from time to time, and Indonesia and the Philippines - constantly. Intensive study of the history of the latter led to the publication in 1937 of two books at once: "The Philippines" in the series " The Capitalist World in Essays "and" Jose Rizal "in the series" The Lives of Remarkable People " (together with O. K. Rakovskaya). In these books, preserving the popular science character of the series, A. A. Guber describes the complex deep processes that led Philippine society to the first anti-colonial, democratic, in its essence, revolution in the history of Asia.

In his Philippine studies, he remains true to himself. Tracing the emergence and growth of the national identity of Filipinos, Alexander Andreevich comes to the conclusion: "The intelligentsia acts as a carrier of national ideas" 10 . Raising the question of what happened in the Philippines after the establishment of US sovereignty over them, he notes that a new type of colony has emerged, that the country has created an incomparable network of schools, that workers began to receive higher wages than in the colonies of European powers .11

For the Soviet reader, the Philippines was discovered by Alexander Andreevich. From his book, for the first time, we learned about the history of this country. In the second book, published in the same year in 1937, the Teacher introduces the national hero who gave his life for the independence of his homeland to the Russian public. The material for the book was fertile. Jose Rizal was a person as bright as he was multi-faceted. He spoke 26 European and Eastern languages, knew many local dialects and dialects, was an excellent artist, sculptor, poet and writer, and a writer whose popularity outlived their author for many decades. In addition, he was a first-class therapist, optometrist and surgeon, political figure and scientist. The figure of Jose Rizal is also significant in one respect - he does not just come from the local traditional culture.-

page 121

ti, but from the part of her that was the cream of the local community. And this did not prevent him from becoming a carrier of the idea of anti-colonial freedom, to awaken a sense of national identity in the people, to assert that skin color does not play any role in the mental and moral development of a person. Jose Rizal was convinced of the creative abilities of his compatriots. The book quotes him as saying: "A new man will be born from the depths of the Philippines, with new energy he will strive for progress. He will direct all his efforts to strengthen his country. Gold will be extracted from the Philippine subsurface; copper, lead, coal and other materials will be mined. The country will develop the trade and shipping activities that island residents are so inclined to do. The Philippines will regain the positive qualities that it enjoyed several centuries ago and that it has now lost. " 12 Jose Rizal became an example of service to the motherland, for which he sacrificed his life. As one of his literary heroes says: "Life is useless if it is not dedicated to a great idea." 13

The book "Philippines" was not noticed by the public. It is significant that such a person as G. I. Levinson, who highly valued A. A. Huber both as a person and as a researcher, does not even mention this monograph in his article "The main milestones of the creative path of A. A. Huber (1902-1971)" 14 . The book about Jose Rizal received a favorable reception. The authors, the reviewer wrote, "successfully coped with the task. They gave a detailed biography of Rizal, a correct analysis of his views, and vividly showed the colonial oppression and national liberation struggle of the Philippine people." The author of the review, S. I. Livshits, did not find any shortcomings at all and made only one remark: in Spanish, the name of the hero of the book is Rizal, and not Rizal, because in Spanish there is no sound " z " 15 .

Lydia S. Guber said: "The husband himself has only one positive ability - he easily learns languages" (everyone agreed with the last part of the statement). The fact is that the Teacher independently studied Spanish, Dutch, and Indonesian, and this led to the fact that in his works we found "Bosch" instead of" Bosch"," Atek "instead of" Ache "and, finally," Rizal "instead of"Rizal".

In his books and articles of 1937, A. A. Huber made the first approach to the study of the new history of the Philippines, the liberation wars of the archipelago's population against Spain and the United States. Continuing to work on this, a key period for the future development of the Philippines. The teacher creates a major monograph "The Philippine Republic of 1898 and American imperialism", which went through two editions: in 1948 and 1961.

This monograph, which, according to domestic and foreign experts, occupies a very special place in the world historiography of the Philippines, 16 grew out of the eponymous doctoral dissertation of A. A. Guber, defended at Moscow State University in 1943. In the introduction to the thesis, the Teacher writes: "As a historian of the Philippines, I was interested in a number of controversial and unclear issues related to this, the most vivid and dramatic period in the centuries-old history of the Philippine people." What was the first thing that attracted the researcher's attention, what questions were he looking for answers to? These questions are as follows: "Were the events of 1896-98 a spontaneous explosion of centuries of accumulated hatred of the Spanish colonial regime and the oppression of monastic orders, or was the war of liberation combined with an attempt to solve the problem of bourgeois transformation of the Philippines? What were the main reasons that made the liberation movement in the archipelago so different from the anti-colonial struggle in the American colonies of Spain? What were the internal forces of the movement and their correlation at different stages? " 17 . Another problem that interested A. A. Huber was the comparative analysis of classical colos-

page 122

territorial regimes and the system established by the United States in the Philippines. He considered this problem " interesting theoretically and practically." His conclusion: what the US created in the Philippines was very different from what history knew.

Here the student considers it necessary to note that this conclusion was neither very original nor very independent. During the Second World War in the USSR, the United States was considered as a very special, closest ally to us. This was most clearly shown in a public lecture delivered by academician I. M. Maisky, a very interesting man with a broad outlook. Speaking at the Polytechnic Museum in early 1946, he argued that the victory of socialism around the world would be ensured if a strong alliance between the USSR and the United States was preserved. Leaving aside this statement, we recognize that, indeed, in the Philippines, the United States is significantly ahead of all other metropolitan areas in terms of both creating the appropriate infrastructure and training a liberal-oriented local elite.

The work of A. A. Huber has remained relevant - that is, contributing to the development of an adequate understanding - and on the verge of millennia, primarily because it reveals the objective content of the events of 1896-1901. The dissertation and monograph recreate a picture of the state of all the domestic and international forces that clashed in the Philippines at the end of the XIX century. The monograph reconstructs the picture of social relations in the country before the Spanish conquest and identifies the main trends of changes in these relations over three hundred years. The teacher clearly defines the difference between the Spanish colonial policy and the corresponding policies of other metropolitan countries: "Unlike the methods of exploitation of colonies by monopoly trading companies of English, Dutch and French capital, the Spanish colonial policy did not stimulate the growth of commodity products, at least on the basis of feudal production methods" 18 . Let's leave out "feudal methods". We will proceed from the fact that this concept denoted everything that preceded the capitalist mode of production, and in the rest-this is a very accurate observation and confirmed by subsequent researchers. The peculiarity of Spanish colonialism was also the fact that local large landowners were in strong opposition to the colonial authorities. Alexander Andreevich is already visible in this statement. He does not directly refute the then generally accepted ideas that large landowners are always the support of retrogradism and reaction, but says that in this particular case, due to local specifics, it was different.

A. A. Huber is also a pioneer in such an important subject as the role of local Spaniards and children from mixed marriages in the development of the ideology and practice of anti-colonial struggle. Modern researchers of Latin America (let us refer at least to the interesting fundamental monograph of N. N. Marchuk 19 ) give a lot of arguments that it was the struggle of local Spaniards and Mestizos for equal rights with the metropolitan population that played a decisive role in the Latin American revolutions of the first third of the XIX century. It seems that the problem of the influence of events in Latin America on the Philippines at the end of the XIX century is still waiting for its researcher. However, A. A. Huber outlines this problem as well. He notes that when the Congress met on September 15, 1898, to adopt the Constitution of the Republic, the Mexican Constitution of 1857 was taken as a model. He goes on to write: "Without fear of being accused of exaggeration, it can be argued that the Philippine Constitution was one of the most democratic of all the bourgeois constitutions known at that time." 20

The teacher remained true to himself, noting the role of the school, the press and the intelligentsia both in awakening national consciousness and in organizing the population to fight corruption.

page 123

colonialism. Despite everything, an extensive public education system leads to the emergence of people who know that it is possible to live differently from how they live and at the same time not to live worse .21 It was infrequent in those years to conclude that the bourgeoisie, essentially an organization, not only during the period of the liberation struggle, but also after coming to power, "continues to fulfill national tasks" 22 .

In the same monograph, A. A. Guber touches on a topic that seriously began to occupy him in the 1950s and 1960s - the specifics of the formation of nations in multiethnic states, when different ethnic groups are at different stages of development. He concludes that the anti-Spanish struggle stimulated the growth of national self-consciousness ("we and they"). But at the same time, along with the formation of the Philippine community, there was also the formation of several nations. It is simply that in the course of the anti-colonial struggle, this did not lead to divisions and conflicts; differences in languages and dialects "did not grow into national discord" 23 .

The conclusions reached by the Teacher in the monograph "The Philippine Republic of 1898 and American Imperialism" go far beyond the scope of the problems indicated in the title. The monograph prepares the reader for a deeper understanding of the entire subsequent history of the Philippine people, and it contributes to the development of a general theory of the anti-colonial liberation movement. The author's final conclusion deserves to be quoted: "The Philippine Revolution failed to secure the country's independence, but it provided the most favorable form of relations with the United States possible for the Philippines at that time and predetermined the further development of Philippine status through the Jones Act of 1916 to Philippine autonomy and independence." 24 An evolutionary approach can be no less effective form of development than a revolution.

In 1961, the second edition of the monograph was published. As the Teacher wrote in his introduction, "the main principles of the author were not revised, but many points could be clarified and revised." 25 This edition contains a lot of new factual material that has been available to researchers since the 1940s, and the works of Filipino authors are more widely presented. In particular, chapter five, "The Treaty of Paris and the Republic's Struggle for International recognition", includes new pages that reveal the attitude of England, France and Japan to the events in the Philippines. The conclusion was removed from the second edition and the analysis ends in 1902, that is, as it was in the dissertation. In the Introduction, A. A. Huber writes that he did not see the need for an extensive conclusion and wrote it in 1947 at the insistence of the editorial board. Since then, independent works of young Filipinists have appeared, which reflect the development of the Philippines over the past 40-50 years, and the need for independent conclusion has disappeared. The second edition sold out just as quickly as the first.

The monograph "The Philippine Republic of 1898 and American imperialism" played a major role in the personal life of A. A. Huber. The fee received for it allowed to buy a cooperative apartment and put an end to wandering "in the corners". In the late 1940s, the idea of creating a professorial housing cooperative emerged. Money for the cooperative had to be paid in the first half of 1948, and many professors devoted 1947 to earnings-fee publications. For various reasons, A. A. Huber's fee was not paid at the end of 1947. He was very worried about it. But then there was a reform and the fees of those who received them were devalued, and the Teacher received a fee with new money, and this was then enough for an apartment fee. What was then considered a professor's apartment: a narrow little corridor, no entrance hall, a tiny kitchen and three small rooms, the largest of them-25 m2 . Of course, the ceilings were high-3 meters. In this apartment, where he had his own room - a library and an office, he lived from 1950 to the end of his days.

page 124

And we, numerous students (L. S. Huber called us nephews) spent many happy hours in it in friendly communication.

The book was noticed by the public. In the first issue of the Chicago Journal of Modem History in 1950, a favorable review by I. Stone appeared. At the height of the Cold War, an American magazine wrote that the reviewed monograph was "the result of serious and competent research", that the author showed a long-term interest in the topic and worked on it since 1937. The review lists all the works of A. A. Huber on the Philippines, published in 1937-1948. For the American reader, we present materials from Russian archives, "which are completely unknown to American and European historians."

A review of the book by A.A. Huber appeared in the Russian press in 1962. When the first generation of students of the Teacher grew up, the students themselves became professionals and major specialists, that is, those who are able to objectively evaluate both the monograph and its contribution to the study of the Philippines as a whole. In the fourth issue of the journal Voprosy Istorii for 1962, G. I. Levinson, the first of A. A. Huber's direct students to become a Doctor of Science, analyzed in detail the monograph "The Philippine Republic of 1898 and American Imperialism". "A. A. Huber's book," he wrote, " occupies a very special place in the historiography of the Philippines." The reviewer notes that many problems have been raised and solved in the monograph. In the vast majority of cases, G. I. Levinson agreed with both the problem statement and the conclusions, but in the spirit of the times, he did not share some of the author's bold statements, which seemed to be too bold at the time, in particular, it concerned the state of the agrarian question in the Philippines. Huber, in his characteristic manner and generally consistent with the facts, argued that "the American authorities in the agrarian question were forced to follow the path outlined by the Philippine Revolution," and this path is the elimination of latifundia and the bet on commodity producers-owners in agriculture. G. I. Levinson objects: "If the revolutionary government confiscated monastic lands the colonial administration bought them out, generously compensated the church at the expense of taxpayers and sold off the land at inflated prices; if the government of the republic authorized the plowing of abandoned landlords ' lands by peasants, then the American authorities banned it." The student did not agree with the statement that the American land policy led to some differences in the situation of the peasantry in the Philippines from other colonies. He believed that " during the years of American domination, landownership grew steadily... and capitalist relations in the countryside developed rather slowly. " 26

G. I. Levinson concludes his review as follows: "The problems covered in this paper go far beyond the history of the Philippines at the end of the 19th century. A. A. Huber's research not only provides a deeper understanding of the entire subsequent history of the Philippines, but is also of great importance for developing the history and theory of the national liberation movement in the era of imperialism." 27 G. I. Levinson repeated this conclusion verbatim in an article published in 1971.28

A. A. Huber's monograph on the Philippines received a more detailed and balanced assessment in the collection dedicated to his memory, prepared at the Institute of Oriental Studies. Three of his students - doctors of sciences, the most prominent specialists in Southeast Asia at that time in our country (A. B. Belenky, G. I. Levinson and V. A. Tyurin) wrote: "This book undoubtedly belongs to the outstanding achievements of Russian Oriental studies. Huber's work occupies a very special place in the world historiography of the Philippines, which is rich in research on the same period. Needless to say, Huber's monograph directly opposes attempts to

page 125

numerous apologists for imperialism distort the history of the Filipino liberation struggle. But neither the works of American historians of the liberal-democratic trend, nor the works of Filipino historians of the modern nationalist school even set the task that Huber made central to his research - to find out the objective social content of the events of 1896-1901." And then: "Subsequent studies of Soviet filipinists, who were able to use a wider range of sources, added a number of details to the picture drawn by Huber, clarified some issues in a new way, but the main provisions of the monograph remained unshaken" 29 .

Between the defense of the doctoral thesis and the publication of the first edition of the monograph, the Gubers experience a terrible tragedy: in 1946, their only son dies, who went on vacation on a ticket obtained with great difficulty. Grief broke his parents, both of them turned gray at once, and Alexander Andreevich was so caught up with scoliosis that he did not straighten up until the end of his days. They had been coming out of the crisis for a long time, but they came out and became a source of friendliness and goodwill for others. V. I. Pavlov, speaking at the memorial service for the Teacher, spoke about him as a "benefactor". And he really was a benefactor to many of us. People came to him not only for advice, but also for money, not to mention the fact that everyone who came was cordially treated. The Teacher has also completely recovered creatively, and remained true to himself - he does not dwell on the mastered topic, although he does not leave it, but shows a tendency to develop new territories and spaces. In the first place in his work are such general problems of Oriental studies as the history of Asia in its entirety; theoretical problems of the liberation anti-colonial struggle - while he is not limited to the scale of Asia, but also considers the" third world " as a whole; historiographical issues.

The leitmotif for the publications of the 1940s was the consistent implementation of the principle of concrete historical analysis of reality. For example, in an article published in 1949 - one might say the first significant new work since the end of the crisis - entitled "The Indonesian people in the struggle for independence", he openly opposed the then very widespread ideas that transfer the development of capitalist relations to the colonial reality. He argued that without understanding the specific stage of socio-political maturation of the respective societies, it is impossible to understand the specifics of the relationship between classes and social groups and the path they have taken in the liberation struggle .30

Insight into the socio-economic processes in Indonesia allowed him to conclude that by the time of independence, the country had not yet developed conditions under which the proletariat and the bourgeoisie were directly opposed to each other. He argued that the specifics of the previous development gave great originality to the process of formation of the main social representatives of modern society throughout the country, and in most of its territory the local bourgeoisie and proletariat were almost completely absent .31 And this led to the fact that "independent political parties and organizations that expressed more or less consciously the interests of these classes... before the Second World War, it practically did not exist at all. As a rule, the popular forces that were awakening to the struggle came out under religious slogans, united in various religious and Muslim organizations, without a clear program and very diverse in their composition. " 32 And in this, you can say, a passing article written on the occasion. The teacher discovered an understanding of real processes and, most importantly, drew attention to what most scientists then passed by: at certain stages of development, political protest condenses

page 126

under a religious guise. In 1949, when the "cold war" was already gaining momentum and both camps declared: "He who is not with us is against us." The teacher writes that the liberation, anti-colonial struggle in Indonesia unfolded at such a stage of its socio-political development that "in any case, in part of the country's territory there was a possibility of an anti-imperialist struggle with the participation and even under the leadership of feudal leaders and even Muslim clergy." 33

A. A. Guber paid much attention to understanding the essence of the process of modernization of traditional societies in general and, in particular, the formation of capitalist relations on colonial soil. And in this respect, he remains a completely modern researcher, whose position cannot but be taken into account when discussing this problem. His position was that the social development of mankind is determined by general laws, the manifestation of which is modified in specific historical conditions.

A. A. Guber most fully formulated his views on the correlation between the general and the special in the development of Asian countries in the generalizing article "On the peculiarities of the formation of classes and parties in colonial Indonesia", published in 1958. Recognizing the effect of general laws in the development of the peoples of colonial and dependent countries, he emphasizes that "internal socio-economic relations between the the forces and peculiarities of the historical development of each nation, the peculiarity of class formation and the correlation of class forces determine the greater variety of ways in which the process of reviving the independence of the Eastern states and establishing forms of political power is taking place... the struggle to eliminate economic dependence on the imperialist countries " 34 . The article analyzes the reasons for the weakness of the Indonesian bourgeoisie, as a result of which its economic and political role was relatively small even in comparison with the bourgeoisie of other colonial countries. Under the domination of imperialist monopolies, the dominance of Chinese and Arab capital, the main exponents of the ideas of liberation from colonialism in Indonesia were the bearers of petty-bourgeois psychology, which could not but leave a significant imprint on the character of the national movement in this country. According to the Teacher, the absence of any noticeable layer of the Indonesian Comprador bourgeoisie at the time of the declaration of independence limited the possibility of using the bourgeoisie as a whole as a social support of the metropolis.

The relationship between the Indonesian bourgeoisie and the labor movement was peculiar. They were determined by the fact that Luddism and other early forms of the labor movement covered almost exclusively the workers of enterprises owned by foreigners - western and eastern, and were even profitable for aspiring Indonesian entrepreneurs. This opened up, writes the Teacher, the objective possibilities of the bourgeoisie's participation in the united national front.

Traditionally, Alexander Andreevich paid much attention to studying the role of the intelligentsia, who took the most active part in the anti-colonial liberation struggle. He noted that the role of the Indonesian intelligentsia was that in politics it expressed the idea of national consolidation, led most nationalist parties and organizations, developed their ideology and programs.

The conclusions formulated in the article "On the peculiarities of the formation of classes and parties in colonial Indonesia" continue to be of fundamental importance for understanding the historical place of the anti-colonial struggle from its origin to the proclamation of state sovereignty, the role of various classes and strata of colonial Indonesian society in it. Contained in the hundred-

page 127

thie analysis of the genesis of the socio-political life of the Indonesian people serves as a key to understanding the vicissitudes of their further domestic and foreign political life. These conclusions were further developed in synthesis reports at international scientific congresses 35 .

Fruitful creative consideration of the complex interaction of international political, socio-economic and historical factors that determined the content side of achieving and asserting political sovereignty was continued by the scientist, in particular, in the introductory article to the collective monograph " National Liberation Movement in Indonesia (1942-1965)", published in 1970.

In the spirit of the times, his attention is drawn to the phenomenon that was then called " petty-bourgeois revolutionary democracy "and" petty-bourgeois mixed intelligentsia. "The struggle for the leadership of the national liberation movement in Indonesia," the Teacher emphasized, " was not limited to the main problem: the hegemony of the proletariat or the hegemony of the bourgeoisie. The fate of Indonesia and its peoples was far from indifferent as to whose hands the leadership of the national liberation movement would fall before the hegemony of the proletariat was won, and whether reactionary nationalist forces or petty-bourgeois revolutionary democracy would succeed in leading the masses. A much larger share in the political life and liberation movement compared to other old colonies" determined the place "of revolutionary democracy and its ideology in the national liberation movement already in the period between the two world Wars." 36 Accordingly, the intelligentsia, whose role in the liberation struggle of the Indonesian people has always been very significant, "remained largely petty-bourgeois" 37 .

A. A. Huber divides the Indonesian intelligentsia of the 1920s and 1930s into four main parts: "those who have moved to the position of the proletariat" and "suffered very serious losses as a result of the repressions of 1926-27", "those who express the interests of bourgeois-national capitalist development", "representatives of semi-feudal, comprador - usurer and feudal-clerical strata", and finally"capable of perceiving socialist ideas in a petty-bourgeois-narodnik or religious - reformist spirit", and it was this latter part that was the most numerous in the specific conditions of Indonesia .38 In general, the insight into the social structure and political behavior of various strata of Indonesian society allowed A. A. Huber to convincingly show the origins of the main political trends - from Budi Utomo and Sarekat Islam to the National Party and Partindo. And his proposed division of the Indonesian intelligentsia still seems interesting and convincing.

A. A. Guber also made a decisive contribution to the development of Russian Indochina and Vietnamese studies. The first systematic presentation of the history of Indochina countries was made by a Teacher. In the textbook for history departments "A New History of Colonial and Dependent Countries", published in 1940, A. A. Huber characterizes the socio-economic system of Indochina states, reconstructs the history of French dominance in the region, reveals the essence of Anglo-French rivalry in Thailand (Siam), and deals with the problem of the birth of the anti-colonial liberation movement.

The teacher was the author of sections on Southeast Asia in such publications as "International Relations in the Far East (1951 and 1956) and"World History". The results of the post-war development of the countries of Southeast Asia were summarized in the report "Trends in the development of the national liberation struggle in Southeast Asia", delivered in 1964 at the XXIV International Congress of Orientalists in Delhi. It analyzed the alignment of social and poly groups.-

page 128

In the course of the struggle for independence and after the achievement of sovereignty, a classification of the types of national liberation movement is given.

The Teacher devoted a lot of effort and energy to one of the most remarkable domestic works on Southeast Asia - a three-volume archive of documents on the policy of European powers and the anti-colonial struggle in Southeast Asia. 39 This publication is of outstanding scientific significance. Thanks to him, a huge number of documents and materials from the second half of the XVIII - early XX centuries became the property of the scientific community, which made it possible to highlight many problems and take a fresh look at a number of issues in the history of Southeast Asia. A. A. Huber's contribution to the publication of the three-volume book, as well as documents on individual Latin American countries, was not limited to simple editing. He has written forewords that provide an in-depth analysis of the history of both individual countries and their respective regions. These prefaces contain a detailed source analysis of various materials and describe the place of Russian archival documents among these materials.

In addition to publishing sources on Latin America, A. A. Huber wrote several special works on the modern and contemporary history of the former Spanish colonies. Many Latin Americans consider him their teacher.

The Teacher's historiographical works should also be noted. Historiographical remarks, mostly of a polemical nature, are found in almost all of Alexander Andreevich's books and articles, but he also has works specifically devoted to the history of Oriental studies. The first of them appeared in 1942. It was called "Studying the History of the Eastern Countries in the USSR for 25 years" and was published in the academic collection "Twenty-five Years of Historical Science in the USSR". This article was published in the same year with minor changes in the "Historical Journal" 40 .

The article describes the traditions of Russian Oriental studies: "A thorough study of Oriental languages, ancient and medieval literature, ideology (in the broadest sense)", describes the work of the main scientific Oriental institutions and journals and the publications of Orientalists of the older, for that time, generation. The main attention is focused on the works of V. V. Barthold, I. Y. Krachkovsky, F. I. Shcherbatsky, S. F. Oldenburg, B. Ya.Vladimirtsov, V. A. Gordlevsky. Alexander Andreevich writes that Russian orientalists in the post-October period studied documents - treaties and agreements of tsarist Russia with Eastern countries, as well as Eastern manuscripts stored in Leningrad, Kazan, and Tashkent: "These richest treasures before the revolution were extremely poorly accounted for and catalogued. Major scientists have taken the initiative to list and identify the scientific value of these often unique manuscripts."

The article traces the development of Russian Oriental studies. The first works, A. A. Guber wrote, were not historical in the true sense of the word, but rather revealed issues of the economy and class structure of individual Eastern countries. Changes occurred in the late 1930s:"For the first time, a full Marxist study of the course of the civil history of the Eastern countries in chronological sequence and the identification of general patterns of the historical development of the colonial world as part of the world historical process was started."

The contribution to the development of Russian Oriental studies of the generation that entered an active creative life in the 1920s and 1930s was appreciated with great kindness, in particular, the general courses of professors of Moscow University I. M. Reisner and N. A. Smirnov, who "sought to identify common patterns of the new and modern history of the colonial world as a whole"were noted. The teacher writes that a new generation of orientalists builds their work on the basis of studying archival materials.-

page 129

sources and press in Eastern languages. In this context, the doctoral dissertations of E. M. Zhukov and N. A. Smirnov are distinguished.

Following the practice of that time, A. A. Guber included in his article on the history of the Eastern countries a report about V. M. Miroshevsky's monograph "The Liberation War of the Spanish Colonies at the beginning of the XIX century", which is being prepared for publication. Its author, who died at the front in August 1944, he calls " our greatest expert on the colonial history of Latin America." The inclusion of Latin America in the general array of colonial countries was justified. But, as is very often the case, there was an inertia to consider Latin America in unity with the countries of Asia and Africa. Then it took many years before the study of this region spun off into an independent branch of humanitarian knowledge. In 1970, in the journal "New and Modern History" A. A. Guber published an article "Problems of the national liberation struggle in Latin America (1810-1826) in the works of Soviet historians" 41 .

A. A. Huber paid much attention to India as a historiographer. Apparently, the fact that he received his Oriental studies education as a historian of South Asia affected him. His position on Indian problems is summarized in the report "Studying India in the Soviet Union" (1954), which he read in a slightly revised form at the 42nd session of the Indian Scientific Congress in 1955. The report gives a high assessment of the classical Russian school of Indology, and describes Minaev's work as "the pinnacle of Russian Indology in the 19th century." Among Soviet researchers, great merits are noted for A. P. Barannikov, whose efforts started the study of modern Indian languages and literature. A. M. Dyakov and I. M. Reisner are the first named historians.

A. A. Huber also contributes to the study of the recent history of India. In particular, at the beginning of 1956, he sent a letter to the editorial board of the magazine "International Life" (No. 3, 1956), in which he opposed the negative assessment of M. Gandhi. The teacher notes that denying the role of M. Gandhi does not allow us to understand the huge authority of Gandhism in India, and consequently, the essence of political processes in this country.

For the overwhelming majority of indologists - from A.M. Dyakov to R. A. Ulyanovsk, from V. I. Pavlov to A. I. Chicherov-the Teacher was either a reviewer, or an opponent on the defense, or an editor, and sometimes he was one in three persons. He also reviewed individual and collective works on the history of the Ottoman Empire, Mongolia, Afghanistan, China, Burma, and general problems of the development of the "third world". Invariably friendly, these reviews encouraged the authors, encouraged them to continue their research, and therefore created the ground for the development of Russian Oriental studies and Latin American studies.

In the field of foreign historiography, the legacy of A. A. Huber is a number of works that retain their significance. Under his leadership, the translation of D. Hall's book "History of Southeast Asia" (1958) was carried out. In the preface to the translation, the Teacher gives a description of the trends in Western European historiography of the region, noting that there are not so rare historical works that objectively study the situation in the respective countries. D. Hall's work notes the richness of the material involved and provides a reasonable criticism of the author's bias towards the colonial policy of Great Britain and its excessive opposition to the policies of other metropolises. After the choice made in the late 1920s, A. A. Huber considered himself primarily a specialist in Indonesia, so he most often reviewed the works of Dutch colleagues, with whom he polemicized, and noted their positive contribution to the study of various aspects of the country's life.

page 130

As a scientist, A. A. Huber was most interested in issues related to modern history. In particular, he made a significant contribution to determining the chronological framework of the "new history" for Asian countries. He has repeatedly noted that there is no serious reason to take the French Revolution as a starting point. He believed that there was much more reason to start counting from the English Revolution of the mid-17th century. After some hesitation, he asserts that a new history for Asia should begin with the era of great geographical discoveries, that is, from the time when constant contacts between European and Asian civilizations begin. This position is set out in the textbook "New History of the countries of the Foreign East" written by the Teacher together with his first graduate student A. N. Heifetz for the historical faculties of pedagogical universities. The first edition appeared in 1961; the textbook was reprinted several times. He followed the same periodization in the collective textbooks on the new history of the East published during his lifetime at Moscow State University.

Since, at the request of Lydia S. Guber, I went through the Teacher's personal library and archive, I have every reason to say that his interest in the events of modern history was unchanged. Over the years, he returns to the problem of the Anglo-Dutch struggle for Indonesia. The sketches for this monograph are written on paper of different quality, in different inks, some are typewritten, some are not. It is obvious that he attached great importance to this topic, having received the only scientific trip in his life to the UK in 1966-1967. While working on the problem of the confrontation between England and Holland in the XVIII - first quarter of the XIX century.the Teacher's attention was drawn to the figure of James Brooke - one of the most prominent representatives of the galaxy of English adventurers-pioneers, whose efforts created the British possessions in the East. Acting at his own risk and at his own expense, James Brooke achieved that on November 24, 1841, he was proclaimed the "white Rajah" of Sarawak and became the sovereign ruler of a vast territory. This work retains its significance to this day, because it reveals the mechanism of one of the ways to create the colonial empire of Great Britain 42 .

My Teacher and I were very close for the last two decades of his life. He was a great lover of life, but he was not afraid of death and spoke about it calmly. Like everyone else, he had his own "fads". He was convinced that if he made a will, he would die immediately afterwards. Therefore, there was no will. He was also afraid of being buried alive. Therefore, he asked that an autopsy be performed and cremated-then they would definitely not be buried alive. In these conversations, when the subject of unfinished works came up, he said that the manuscripts should be prepared for publication by his students A. B. Belenky and G. I. Levinson-doctors of sciences in Indonesia and the Philippines, respectively. The fragments of manuscripts I found were collected in a small suitcase and handed over by Lidia Sergeevna Guber to these great scientists and decent people. The fulfillment of the last will of the teacher required considerable time, but in 1976 the book " A. A. Huber. Selected Works", where Belenky and Levinson modestly called themselves "editors-compilers". The book was published under the editorship of a long - term friend, colleague and neighbor in the dacha of the deceased-E. M. Zhukov.

The international activity of the Teacher was extensive and multifaceted. Since 1953, he has been a constant participant or head of Soviet delegations in almost all international meetings of Oriental historians. At each of them, he made presentations, and then published articles in Russian periodicals, where he talked about the work of conferences. Since 1957, A. A. Guber has headed the National Committee of Historians of the Russian Federation and since that year has been a member of the governing bodies of the International Committees of Historical Sciences and Oriental Studies. His labors in Moscow were

page 131

For the first time, the International Congress of Orientalists (XXV) was held, and in 1970-the International Congress of Historical Sciences, where he was elected president of the International Committee of Historical Sciences. As S. O. Schmidt wrote, "the works of A. A. Huber reflect only to a small extent his rare human charm, the liveliness of perception and reaction, the democratism of a genuine intellectual, and the features that became a historiographical factor that contributed to a certain extent to the development of Soviet science and the spread of the Marxist-Leninist worldview among world science." 43

The rare human charm and sharpness of reaction were fully manifested in the pedagogical activity of A.A. Huber. It began at the Communist University of the Workers of the East and continued until the tragic day of June 16, 1971. Since 1937, A. A. Guber has been a professor at Moscow State University, lecturing at various universities in Moscow and Leningrad, Tver and Kaluga. The bright personality of the teacher and his passion for the topic aroused many students ' interest in the life of the peoples of the Eastern countries, their history and culture. His phrases became proverbs, turned into Oriental folklore, and his gestures were reproduced by many generations of students. During his lifetime, 103 of his direct students became candidates of science, many defended their doctoral dissertations. The core of the research and teaching teams involved in the study of South and South-East Asia and Latin America were either his students or students of his students. He worked and participated in the life of many groups. It is significant that on June 16, 1971, he was expected at the Institute of General History. The Institute of Oriental Studies, the Institute of Latin America, the Institute of Asian and African Countries at Moscow State University, and the Academy of Social Sciences under the Central Committee of the CPSU. Everyone said afterwards, with equal justification,that on his last trip he was going to them. The Teacher's erudition seemed inexhaustible. Once, in the early 1960s, we talked to V. P. Gorodnov, who complained that there was no one to discuss the problems of South Africa that interested him. I advised him to talk to Alexander Andreevich. This advice was not immediately accepted, but since the need to discuss it remained, V. P. Gorodnov came to consult with Huber. He came back from it delighted and even stunned by how deeply Alexander Andreevich knew and felt the peculiarities of the development of this region. "Now," said V. P. Gorodnov, " everything is in place." Maybe that's why he became one of our leading experts on South Africa.

Deep knowledge of the methodology of concrete historical analysis, thorough knowledge of the entire available set of sources, fine intuition and excellent orientation in the situation allowed the Teacher to take a principled, independent position. In many cases, he was ahead of his colleagues and comrades in penetrating the essence of the social, economic and political processes taking place in the countries of the East.

And his death was unusual. He and Lydia Sergeevna were returning from their dacha on June 16. At a traffic light, before leaving Yakimanka for Maly Kamenny Bridge, we stopped. Alexander Andreevich said to his wife:"How well the road has been arranged here." They gave the green light. He stepped on the gas and died instantly - a ruptured aorta. As he lived all his life in work and care, so he died on the move, in absolute readiness for new achievements.

It is obvious that the Teacher was a rare combination of an academic orientalist with a lively observant researcher, who was sensitive to the most fundamental and promising trends in the development of colonial and dependent countries. His weighty word and accurate assessments are not outdated and on the verge of millennia and have retained their relevance, helping to adequately perceive both the past and the present in life.-

page 132

nor the peoples of the East. Any meeting with his participation acquired special significance. He was always friendly and attentive to the audience and especially to the speakers, and selflessly shared his knowledge and time with all of us. With him, each beginner was encouraged, because he really felt that his words were treated with interest and listened to seriously. He loved science and the people involved in it.

notes

Huber A. A. 1 Review by: Mayhew A. The Education of India. L., 1926 / / New East. M " 1927, N 19. P. 38.

2. Guber A. A. 2 Polozhenie rabochego klassa v Ekonomii [The situation of the working class in Indonesia]. Revolyutsionniy Vostok, Moscow, 1928, No. 4/5, p. 141.

3 Ibid., p. 142.

4 tribes of the Kushkinsky district // Revolyutsionniy Vostok, Moscow, 1930, No. 8, pp. 267-281.

Huber A. A. 5 Indonesia. Sotsial'no - ekonomicheskie ocherki [Socio-economic Essays], Moscow, 1932, p. 219.

6 Ibid., p. 184.

Belen'ky A. B., Levinson G. I., Tyurin V. A. 7 A. A. Guber - sozdatel sovetskoy shkoly izucheniya Yugo-Vostochnoy Azii [Guber-the creator of the Soviet School of studying Southeast Asia]. Collection of articles in memory of A. A. Guber, Moscow, 1972, p. 10.

Guber A. A. 878. P. 290.

Gnevusheva E. A. 9 Academician Alexander Andreevich Guber, Moscow, 1987, p. 53.

Guber A. A. 10-11. Moscow, 1937. p. 22.

11 Ibid., pp. 46, 103.

Guber A. A., Rakovskaya O. K. 12 Jose Rizal. Moscow, 1937. p. 131.

13 Ibid., p. 143.

Levinson G. I. 14 Osnovnye vekhi tvorcheskogo puti A. A. Guber (1902-1971) [The main milestones of the creative path of A. A. Guber (1902-1971)]. 1971. Moscow,1973.

Livshits S. I. 15 Review of A. A. Huber's book "Jose Rizal" / / The Book and the Proletarian Revolution. 1938, N 1. P. 104.

Levinson G. I. 16 Decree. soch. P. 229.

Huber A. A. 17 Philippine Republic of 1898. Diss. ... Doctor of Historical Sciences , Moscow State University, 1943, p. 1.

Huber A. A. 18 The Philippine Republic of 1898 and American Imperialism, Moscow, 1958, p. 46.

Marchuk N. N. 19 Liberal reforms and the War for Independence of Latin America, Moscow, 1999.

Guber A. A. 20 The Philippine Republic... p. 129.

21 Ibid., p. 65.

22 Ibid., pp. 165-166.

23 Ibid., p. 180.

24 Ibid., p. 214.

Huber A. A. 25 The Philippine Republic of 1898 and American Imperialism. 2nd ed. Moscow, 1961, p. 6.

Levinson G. I. 26 Review of: Guber A. A. The Philippine Republic of 1898 and American Imperialism, Moscow, 1961. //Questions of history. 1962. N4. pp. 134-136.

27 Ibid., p. 136.

Levinson G. I. 28 Osnovnye vekhi tvorcheskogo puti A. A. Guber... p. 229. Belenky A. B., Levinson G. I., Tyurin V. A. Op. op., pp. 17, 19. Guber A. A. Ekzoneziyskiy narod v borbebe za nezavisimosti [The Indonesian people in the struggle for Independence]. Krizis kolonialnoi sistemy [Crisis of the Colonial System]. National Liberation Struggle of the peoples of East Asia, Moscow-L., 1949, p. 137.

31 Ibid., p. 138.

32 Ibid., p. 139.

33 Ibid., p. 138.

Guber A. A. K. the question of the peculiarities of the formation of classes and parties in colonial Indonesia. Cit. by: Guber A. A. Izbrannye trudy [Selected Works], Moscow, 1976, p. 71.

35 See: A. A. Guber, Trends in the development of the colonial-liberation struggle in South-East Asia (Reports of the USSR delegation at the XXIV International Congress of Orientalists), Moscow, 1963; A. A. Guber, Mil.

page 133

Political and economic changes in the countries of Asia and Africa in the XX century (Report at the XII International Congress of Historians) / / Peoples of Asia and Africa. 1965. N 6.

Guber A. A. 36 Vvedenie [Introduction] / / National Liberation Movement in Indonesia (1942-1965), Moscow, 1979, pp. 23-24.

37 Ibid., p. 31.

38 Ibid., pp. 31-32.

39 Policy of European powers in Southeast Asia (50s of the XVIII-60s of the XIX centuries). Documents and Materials, vol. 1, Moscow, 1962; Politics of the Capitalist Powers and the National Liberation Movement in Southeast Asia (1871-1917). Documents and materials. Part 1. Moscow, 1965; Politics of the capitalist Powers and the national liberation movement in Southeast Asia (1871-1917). Documents and materials. Part 2. Moscow, 1967.

40 Historical journal. 1942, N 10. pp. 91-97.

Problems of the national liberation struggle in Latin America (1810-1826) in the works of Soviet historians // New and Recent History. 1970. N 1. pp. 32-38.

42 Huber A. A. Izbrannye trudy, pp. 171-224.

Schmidt S. O. 43 Some issues of source studies and historiography of the history of social thought and historiography. M., 1976. P. 272.

Permanent link to this publication: