New York: Basic books, 2009, 274 p., 2 maps*.

Roman Fyodorovich von Ungern-Sternberg (1885-1921) - participant of the Civil War in Russia, Manchuria and Mongolia at the beginning of the XX century. The life of this man, who sought to suppress revolutions and restore monarchies to Russia and other countries in Europe and Asia, was unusual. It did not achieve its goal, but without it there would not have been a modern independent State of Mongolia. I will not dwell here on the personality of R. F. Ungern: this is mentioned in many publications (about 700 in total). The availability of Russian and Mongolian archives after the collapse of socialism in the USSR and Mongolia revealed what was previously classified. This was partly published and allowed J. R. R. Tolkien to do so. Palmer can use not only previously available materials, but also a number of new ones. As a result, his book, written in the non-fiction genre, was very popular, and in the West it was considered as a scientific source. There is a German edition (2010), you can expect new ones. So it is useful to analyze it from a scientific point of view.

For the review, I used two versions of the book: an electronic version with the title given above, and a paper version: James Palmer. The Bloody White Baron. London: Faber & Faber, 2008, 274 p. Pagination is the same in both of them, and I didn't find any discrepancies in the text, so I won't separate them in the discussion.

The book consists of the following sections: "Acknowledgements", "Maps", "Introduction", 9 chapters, "Epilogue", "Notes", "Bibliography", "Index". Chapter 1, "The Son of Crusaders and Pirates," provides an overview of R. F. Ungern's genealogy. Chapter 2 "The Ends of the World" is devoted to the biography of R. F. Ungern before the First World War in the context of the structure of Russian society, its stratification and the maturation of the revolutionary situation. Chapter 3, "Suspended between Heaven and Hell" - a quote from the philosopher G. Kaiserling-describes Ungern's first trip to Mongolia and provides a brief description of this country, its people and religion. Chapter 4, "Everything is Falling Apart," deals with the First World War and Ungern's involvement in it. Chapter 5, "The Land of Corpses," deals with the civil war in Transbaikalia in the context of Ungern's activities. Chapter 6, "The Furious Crusade," describes the entry and operations of Ungern's forces into Mongolia. Chapter 7, " The Ruler of the Steppe "(similar to the title of L. A. Yuzefovich's book" The Autocrat of the Desert"), describes the White people's stay in Mongolia; in addition, it analyzes the political and religious views of R. F. Ungern. Chapter 8, "One Hundred and Thirty Days," mainly tells the story of Ungern's campaign in Siberia and what it led to. Chapter 9, "The Last Adventurer," deals with the capture of R. F. Ungern, his trial, and his execution. The "Epilogue" describes Stalin's repressions in Mongolia, describes the status of this country after the revolution, provides comparisons with Tibet, as well as personal observations of J. R. R. Tolkien. Palmer's.

The book is easy to read and fun-even for those who are not native speakers of English. The material is distributed logically, and many facts unknown to the Western reader are given. I will not discuss the merits of the book: they are more or less accurately reflected in a number of laudatory reviews-from online resources to major newspapers such as the Sunday Telegraph, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and Süddeutsche Zeitung. Although the Russian-speaking reader is unlikely to consider this book a new word, J. Palmer sometimes cites information unknown from other sources, but apparently based on eyewitness accounts (for example, that R. F. Ungern sent home his uniform with bullet holes and traces of blood from the fronts of the First World War - p. 74). It's just a pity that the sources are not listed everywhere.

At the same time, there are shortcomings in the book. The first thing that catches your eye is the incorrect title of the book (the error is repeated in the text on page 1). Ungern was not "the last khan of Mongolia". It is known that in Mongolia " khaan "(i.e., emperor, or great Khan, ruler of the state) is not the same as" khan " (the highest princely title, which did not mean power over the whole of Mongolia). According to the decree of Bogdo-gegen VIII (who was just the great khan),

* James Palmer. The bloody white baron. An unusual story of a Russian nobleman who became the last Khan of Mongolia. New York: Basic Books, 2009. 274 p., 2 maps.

R. F. Ungern received the title of "hereditary Grand Duke of Darkhan-Hoshoy Chin-wan in the degree of Khan" (Kuzmin, 2004(1), p. 91). He became the Grand Duke, but not the monarch of Mongolia, which Bogdo-gegen remained.

There are the following errors in the description of the period before the Mongolian epic. It is not true that in Estonia, during the First Russian Revolution, the main cause of the revolutionary movement was "national revival" (pp. 24-25). In fact, there were pogroms in other parts of the Russian Empire as well, although one of the components was sometimes nationalism. In general, the performances were spontaneous, regardless of the satisfaction of the demands made - the main thing was to find an image of "evil" for revenge [Sukhova, 2006, p. 65-69].

R. F. Ungern's father was not an amateur geologist (p. 17), but a professional in this field. He defended his dissertation in geology at the University of Leipzig. R. F. Ungern received his first medal not at the end of the Russo-Japanese War (p. 22), but much later - in 1913. period of service in the Amur regiment "his list mentions various "incidents", which should be understood as quarrels, fights and duels " (p. 39). Ungern's service record and attestation in this regiment do not indicate any incidents [Kuzmin, 2004(1), pp. 50-54]. J. Palmer writes about Ungern's second duel in Blagoveshchensk (the first was in Dauria). It is obvious, however, that different sources refer to the same duel. It is not true that Ungern's departure from the Argun and Amur regiments was connected with two duels (p. 39).

There are also mistakes in describing the activities of R. F. Ungern in Transbaikalia during the Civil War (for example, Ungern soldiers did not cut the fingers of those passing through the Dauria station to take the rings-p. 93-94, the Asian Cavalry Division was formed not in February 1920 (p. 112), but in 1919). Semyonov awarded R. F. Ungern the Second Order of St. George in March 1919 and promoted him to Lieutenant General (p. 101). This order was awarded by the decree of the St. George Duma, and Ungern received the rank of Lieutenant General from Semenov much later, in 1921, for the capture of Urga.

J. Palmer will give a generally realistic picture of the anti-Chinese Mongol movement in the early twentieth century. Like many other authors, he always refers to the Qing Empire as China. In reality, it was a Manchurian state that included China, Mongolia, and other parts. Its disintegration into nation-states, including China, gave Mongolia the right to self-determination. For three centuries Mongolia did not have Chinese control and administration (p.45), but Manchu officials representing the Manchu dynasty. Accordingly, at the time of Galdan Khan, the Western Mongols challenged the Qing Empire in Central Asia, not "China and Russia" (p. 128).

Let's move on to the description of the Mongolian epic. The main disadvantages here are the author's bias and selective use of sources. The memoirs are mostly used by D. Aleshin [Alioshin, 1941] and N. M. Ryabukhin [Ribo, Hoover], who left very incomplete and strongly ideologized memories. One can understand why the author does not use more complete descriptions of events by N. N. Knyazev: this is a supporter of R. F. Ungern. But it is not clear why the neutral and detailed memoirs of M. G. Tornovsky were ignored, despite the fact that J. R. R. Tolkien wrote a series of memoirs. Palmer refers to the publication of both sources [Kuzmin, 2004 (2)].

It follows from the book that all the nobles of Mongolia agreed to the plan of abolishing its autonomy in favor of China, developed by Chen Yi (p. 122). In reality, they were only a part of the higher feudal lords. According to the book, Bogdo-gegen VIII was dissatisfied with the outrages of Chinese soldiers in Urga because he could no longer drive his cars on holidays (p.125). It turns out that for Bogdo-gegen VIII, the main goal was always to preserve his comfortable life (p.166). Approximately the same thing was written by red propaganda. This is incorrect. Bogdo-gegen played a crucial role in the struggle for Mongolian independence.

The map and description of R. F. Ungern's operations in Mongolia contain inaccuracies. According to the memoirs of M. G. Tornovsky (Kuzmin, 2004 (2), p. 200), he entered Mongolia not "in early September", but on October 1, 1920. Preparations for the assault and the battles for Usu are described in very fragmentary detail. Instead, the author filled the pages with descriptions (some of them unreliable) of individual tortures, executions, minor incidents, etc. You can also learn a funny story about an elephant that escaped from the Bogdo-gegen zoo: it turns out that the elephant was found a week later at a distance of a hundred miles grazing in a herd of camels (p.151). And this is in the Mongolian winter with snow and temperatures below 30 °C!

By the time of the second battle of Urga, the wagons with the property of the Asian division were actually located in the area of the Tola River-but not Onona (p. 132), from which Urga is not 20, but more than 200 km away. In Urga there were not a couple of thousand Chinese soldiers (p. 132), but about 7,000 (according to M. G. Tornovsky: [Kuz-

min, 2004(2), p. 211]). After the first defeats, Ungern retreated not to Zam Kuren (p. 135 and map), but to Gun Galutai on the Kerulen River. There were no conscripted Russian peasants (p.135) in the Asiatic Division. Cases of plague from feeding on marmots (p. 136) are not confirmed by sources, and marmots sleep in winter, but get them in summer.

The looting of the Lamyn-Gegen-Dadlen-hiid monastery by Ungernovtsy (p. 135) is not recorded in the sources: it would be stupid to rob the monastery when the clergy was one of the baron's pillars. Also from the realm of fantasy is the phrase: "There were rumors that he left a treasure behind, looted from monasteries and buried somewhere in the steppe" (p. 2).

Based on the memoirs of D. Aleshin, the story of the poisoning of wounded whites in a field hospital by doctor A. F. Klingenberg is described, allegedly with the sanction of R. F. Ungern. More reliable and detailed data can be found in the memoirs of Golubev and A. S. Makeev: Lieutenant Colonel Laurentz, on behalf of the baron, ordered paramedic Logunov to poison the wounded, for which he was shot by order of Ungern [Kuzmin, 2004(1), pp. 448, 529]. The burning of deserters and recalcitrant recruits (p. 137) is not confirmed by documents and memoirs. J. Palmer quotes from D. Aleshin about the brutal reprisal of R. F. Ungern against soldiers who deserted led by Lieutenant Ruzhansky, and against the latter's wife (p. 139). However, the author does not mention that Ruzhansky had previously forged Ungern's signature, embezzled 15 thousand rubles in gold and tried to escape with his wife at the very time when the division was starving in the cold. Ruzhansky's wife was raped, by the way, not by the Chakhar Mongols, but by Ungern's counterintelligence agents.

According to the memoirs of M. G. Tornovsky, before the decisive assault on Urga, the baron had not 5,6 thousand (p. 143), but 1,460 people [Kuzmin, 2004(2), p.208]. The Japanese at Ungern did not serve as gunners (for example, p.153), but formed a mounted company (the gunners were Russians under the command of Captain Dmitriev - according to the same Tornovsky). By the way, the name of the Japanese officer was not Hiro Yama (p.128), but Koutarou Hatakeyama. There is no reason to believe that the Buryats were the main force in Ungern's troops (p. 195 and others). The decisive assault on Urga was not caused by a random rocket launched by someone (p. 153-154), but went according to plan. The main lines of Chinese trenches were not at Maimachen (p. 150-151), but at the villages of Upper and Lower Modochiny. It is not true that the Ungernovtsy kept bonfires on Mount Bogdo-ula near Urga for two months (p. 146): they were lit a day or two before the assault, so that they could orient themselves at night. There are no statistics on the losses of the Chinese during the storming of Urga; the figures given by the author (p. 155) are a guess. Usu was cleared of corpses after the battles not by Ungern's soldiers, but by captured Chinese (p. 161).

After the capture of Urga, the most important events of the struggle against the Chinese invaders were the battles in the Tola River valley, near Talyn-Ulan-khad, Choyryn-Khure, and the campaign to Zamyn-Ude. They are not marked on the map, and in the text instead of describing them, there are only confused fragments. But these events are consistently and clearly described by M. G. Tornovsky. In the area of Zamyn-Ude, the Chinese were pursued not by Rezukhin (who was then in Urga), but by Ungern and Meiren Dugarzhav. Ude (=Zamyn-Ude) is not "about 20 miles north of Urga" (p.158), but 592 km southeast of it. Speaking about the mountains of corpses along the Tola River (p. 158), J. Palmer is probably based on the book by F. A. Ossendowski (1922). These were other battles that Rezukhin actually fought in the beginning - in the area of the Tola River near the Talyn-Ulan-Khad mountain west of Urga (Zamyn-Ude has nothing to do with it). The story of the surrender and flight of the Chinese refers specifically to these battles. Palmer's got it all mixed up. The Chinese then surrendered to Ungern, then some of them fled, the rest formed a separate detachment. Those who escaped were chased for a long time and some of them were destroyed. Quote from Haslund's memoirs on p. 159 refers to a completely different, earlier episode (even before Ulan-had) - to the defeat of the Chinese at Choiryn-khure (about 240 km south-east of Urga). They were defeated not only by the Mongol-Khalkhas, but also by the Ungernovtsy, whom the baron commanded personally. Just from there, the Whites moved further south - to Zamyn-Ude.

The situation in Mongolia during R. F. Ungern's stay there is described inaccurately. It is not true that he restored five ministries in Mongolia, effectively controlled the government, and was the dictator of Mongolia (p.167) [Kuzmin, 2011, pp. 200-228]. It is equally incorrect that each department initially had white representatives from Ungern (p. 167). There were only a few advisers in the Mongol government, who had helped the Mongols long before Ungern and were by no means his representatives.

J. Palmer finds similarities in Ungern's actions to regulate the market in Mongolia with the measures taken by the Communists, and explains this by the baron's bad attitude towards merchants (since the latter are too close to "Jewish-capitalist ideals"), Ungern's seizure of funds from a Chinese bank, and murders of entrepreneurs (pp. 195-196). This is incorrect.

Production after the expulsion of the invaders began to improve. However, Mongolia was heavily dependent on trade with Russia and China, and in 1921 fell into a virtual blockade. Regulation of commodity-money relations is a common measure in such conditions. The first paper money of new Mongolia was not " issued by Bogdo Khan on behalf of Ungern." The true story of this money is not the one written by J. Palmer (Nyamaa and Gunbold, 2007).

In describing the terror in Mongolia, J. R. R. Tolkien wrote: Palmer writes that the priest, Fr. Parnyakov was killed for his son: he was a red activist. He emphasizes this later (p. 230). However, F. Parnyakov himself held left-wing views, helped communists escape from Russia to Manchuria, was one of the creators of a legal "roof" for underground work in Urga, and took part in the creation of an underground revolutionary committee and an Information Bureau to perform secret tasks (Darevskaya, 1997). M. G. Tornovsky blames the red council of the Russian colony for the ill-treatment of the Chinese and Russians in prison and their execution in Urga. Parnyakova [Kuzmin, 2004(2), p. 189].

The description of Ungern's campaign in Siberia is given very superficially, despite the fact that, I repeat, the author had at his disposal the detailed memoirs of M. G. Tornovsky. Although J. R. R. Tolkien Palmer tries to keep the chronology straight, but it's often broken. For example, the different color of bashlyks in different detachments of Ungernovtsy appeared just before the campaign to Siberia (by May 1921), and not during the stand on Kerulen (in the winter of 1920/1921) (p. 144). The famous Ungernovsky Order No. 15 was prepared not only by F. A. Ossendovsky, but also by some others [Kuzmin, 2011, p.238]. Instead of analyzing the order, it would be more rational to translate it in its entirety. J. Palmer inaccurately explains the true reason for the entry of Soviet troops into Mongolia in 1921 (p. 208). The strategic goal at that time was to spread the socialist revolution through Mongolia to China (Zheleznyakov, 2009: 202-209). After the death of Bayar-gun near Kyakhta, Ungern crippled the Klingenbsrga doctor not for this (p. 207), but by accusing him of not helping the wounded Chakhars. P. Sukharev did lead his detachment to China, but not together with Colonel N. N. Kazagrandi (p.211), but after he shot the latter. The Mongol prince Sundui-gong allegedly told Ungern: "Russians, in general, are all bad people" (p. 223). However, the reference [Kuzmin, 2004(1), p. 208] by J. R. R. Tolkien is to It is given incorrectly by Palmer: it is not there. It is not clear at all where this comes from. By the way, Sundui-gong was not later executed (p. 237), he died after breaking his leg after falling from a horse.

The author's statements on the national question are noteworthy. Some Russian nobles, it turns out, considered themselves a race separate from the peasantry (p.23). The Cossacks received the following ratings. After another mention of anti-Semitism (though this time in connection with the small number of Jews in Transbaikalia), a remark is made about the "brutality" of the Cossacks, to whom they resemble the Mongols. Apparently, the" justification " of this assessment should serve as a quote from the historian J. R. R. Tolkien. Kigan that the brutality of the Cossacks revived in the minds of the raids of the steppe hordes, "buried in the darkest corners of collective memory" (p. 33). It turns out that "the Cossacks were also considered cowards, preferring the easy work of stabbing peasants and slaughtering Jews to the dangers of battle. They were rarely willing to face any form of head-on resistance" (p. 33). It is not clear, however, how this is consistent with the further mention of the bravery of the Cossacks in suicidal attacks on fortifications (p.34). In general, "the majority of ethnic Russians retained a deeply racist attitude towards various Asian peoples" (p.36).

I will not compare the attitude of Russians to Asians and, for example, Anglo-Saxons in general. It is better to give the judgments specifically of J. R. R. Tolkien. Palmer's. "Ethnically Russian villagers viewed Ungern's Mongol soldiers with a long-standing contempt for the nomad soft, sedentary farmer" (p.106). The first thing that the author indicated for the capital of Mongolia before describing it is the stench and dirt (p. 44). Further descriptions of the capital resemble a cross between Bolshevik propaganda and Eurocentrism. For the Mongols, "drunkenness and bragging were considered as important" as the three main sports - one of the two amusements along with religion (p. 46).

However, the Germans also got it. According to J. R. R. Tolkien, According to J. Palmer, the Russian Germans never considered that they were part of the host country, to some extent they remained colonists, which gave rise to a "conflict full of contradictions". Moreover, "the Baltic German community was closely linked to the pan-German Volkisch movements and produced a remarkably large number of Nazi leaders and thinkers" (pp. 14-15). How can we not recall the" justification " for the eviction of all Germans from the European part of the USSR under J. V. Stalin?.. In fact, Russian Germans, while maintaining their ethnicity, considered themselves part of Russia just like other peoples.

At the same time, the reader should be happy to find that the author does not make "critical judgments" about Jews. Moreover, he puts the latter out of place and out of place (the book deals with them on 42 pages out of 274).

However, with the alien religion of J. R. R. Tolkien. Palmer doesn't stand on ceremony. "The history of Tibetan Buddhism is a corrupt and Byzantine scam, as if made to order in order to meet the requirements of old - fashioned anti-clericalism" (p.55). Why is that? "Most Buddhists around the world, however, are enthusiastic worshippers of all kinds of gods and spirits" (p. 3). The basis of Buddhism is not really in the worship of gods and spirits. The author must be a major religious scholar to have such unusual statistics... Is it so?

Already from J. Palmer's impressions of the works of Jesuit missionaries and of a Buddhist temple in Inner Mongolia (p.5-6), one can see his deep ignorance of Buddhism. This is evident in many quotes. "Theosophy is a type of stripped-down and generalized version of Hinduism and Tibetan Buddhism" (p. 28). In reality, theosophy is neither Buddhism nor Hinduism. "Tibetan Buddhism focuses on magic, secret teachings, spirits and demons, the acquisition of special powers, and the highest status of a monk or lama" (p. 4-5). In fact, Tibetan Buddhism is an exact Tibetan-language version of late Indian Mahayana Buddhism (Dalai Lama XIV, 2008: 50, 56-57). The main thing in it is self-improvement, and not what J. R. R. Tolkien listed. Palmer.

"Buddhist theologians, especially those who seek to promote this religion in the West, try to boldly co-opt corpses and skulls and bloody weapons into images of peace and salvation. Their efforts- "A corpse on which one jumps with one's feet represents the death of the material world" - are unconvincing" (p. 62). In fact, images of aggression in Buddhism denote spiritual forces that eliminate negative karma and attack the inner enemies of obscuration of consciousness. In Buddhism, these images are considered a guide to action only in the inner (spiritual) world, but not in the external (physical) one. Symbols are also sexual images in Tibetan Buddhism. They indicate the need to combine the understanding of emptiness (Skt: shunyata) and the method (compassion) for Liberation [Kuzmin, 2010, pp. 125-126].

These are the basics of Buddhism that J. R. R. Tolkien doesn't want to understand. Palmer. Hence his enumeration of the "black sides of enlightened gods" - tantric forms of deities (p. 62). Hence, too, the "religious art sometimes goes astray on the path of explicit pornography" type of assessment (p.64). Or such: "The gods were usually depicted in warlike poses, brandishing weapons and trampling corpses, but sometimes joined together in skilful and improbable athletic pairs, no doubt for the bawdy amusement of older and more sophisticated female pilgrims" (p.45). The author connects animal sacrifices in Mongolia with Buddhism, where such "holocausts were an integral part of the Mongolian ritual" (pp. 60-61). In fact, meat is the main food of the nomadic Mongols. That's why they slaughter cattle. Before eating, meat could first be dedicated to the deities... But it's still bad there: "The temples were everywhere-dark and smoky" (p. 45).

In the iconography of Buddhism, the author also shows ignorance. Yamantaka is not the god of death (p. 47), but, on the contrary, the conqueror of death. Dokshits (not dashgids) not "spirits of the air" (p. 62), but guardians of the Teaching. A giant statue of Avalokiteshvara Bodhisattva was brought from Inner Mongolia (more precisely, Dolonnor), not of Buddha (p. 59). By the way, J. Palmer is wrong: Bogdogegan VIII's vision improved after that [Kuzmin and Oyunchimeg, 2009, p. 61]. It is not true that the swastika was understood as an anti-Semitic symbol in the early twentieth century (p. 96). The enumeration that this symbol is "Buddhist, esoteric and anti-Semitic, which was also very common in Mongolia" (p. 96) is clearly intended to denounce all of this together. Parallels between the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" and the "Esoteric religions of the East" in the form of a quotation from f. Ossendowski (pp. 96-97) is unconvincing: the latter was poorly versed in Buddhism. Hence the incorrect conclusion that R. F. Ungern used the swastika not only as a "Buddhist motif", but allegedly for anti-Semitic reasons, as most White Guards could do (p. 129).

No serious sources say that in Mongolia R. F. Ungern was "worshipped as a god" (p. 1), and Prince Amursana as the incarnation of Mahakala (p.58-59). That the King of Peace lives in Shambhala (p. 65), F. A. believed. Ossendowski, not Mongols. It is not proven that the Dalai Lama IV was killed by the Tibetans for being a Mongol (p. 5).It is not true that "the influence of theosophical language and ideas is evident whenever Ungern discusses religion" (p. 29). Ossendowski attributed theosophical ideas to him, while Ungern's surviving words correspond to Buddhism, not theosophy.

Ignorance of Buddhism in J. R. R. Tolkien Palmer is combined with primitive propaganda against this religion. I will not comment on the following quotations from his book: all this has been repeatedly refuted [Kuzmin, 2010; Kuzmin, 2011].

"Tibetan Buddhism paved some roads to China, but it had a bad reputation. Folk tales often associated it with sexual rituals, human sacrifice, corruption, and a host of other evils. This reputation has often been attached to Buddhism in general, but the Tibetan branch has acquired the worst. This was mainly due to religious jealousy, lust, and xenophobia" (pp. 124-125). Homosexuality "was considered a perfectly acceptable vice among Mongol monks" (p.53). The "proof" is an anecdotal statement made by a Japanese spy in Tibet in 1940. "The monks were sure of at least a full bowl and a comfortable place to sleep, and the temples were full of businessmen who accumulate most of Mongolia's wealth" (p. 45).

It is not surprising that J. R. R. Tolkien Palmer collected a complete set of incriminating gossip about the theocratic leader of Mongolia, Bogdo-gegen VIII (pp. 52-55). Although Palmer writes that there are exaggerations in these stories, "contemporary Mongolian and foreign eyewitnesses ""testified to his ruthlessness, alcoholism and greed" (p.54). Of these "eyewitnesses", however, only foreigners with an unreliable reputation are cited. Larson and F. Ossendowski. Again, it is not surprising: there is no reliable first-hand evidence [Kuzmin, 2011, p. 330-335]. However, in the book by J. R. R. Tolkien, Something new also appears: it turns out that R. F. Ungern (p.177), Bogdo-gegen VIII (p. 55), the Dalai Lama XIII (p. 130), and most Chinese militarists (p. 181) were paranoid. My knowledge of psychology matches my knowledge of Buddhism... Along the way, Nazi expeditions to Tibet are mentioned. It doesn't matter that there were no alliances between the Tibetan theocracy and the Nazis. Another important hint is to associate Buddhism with anti-Semitism.

It turns out that during the coronation of Bogdo-gegen VIII in 1921, "Ungern proclaimed himself the reincarnation of Bogdo-gegen V, the predecessor of Bogdo Khan, a very stupid figure of the early nineteenth century" (p.163). The author himself is surprised at the absurdity of this: the reincarnation of Bogdo-gegen V at that time was Bogdo-gegen VIII. Why this paradox? Perhaps from Anvan's memoirs, where, however, the wording is somewhat different:" At that time, Baron Ungern was greatly exalted - that he was a reborn fifth Bogdo " [Kuzmin, 2004(1), p.554]. By the way, Bogdo-gegen V is "dull" or "dull", according to J. R. R. Tolkien. Palmer was famous in Mongolia: his short reign is known for the founding of religious schools and monasteries.

It is not true that R. F. Ungern embodied in reality the tortures depicted in Buddhist temples (pp. 67, 141, 161). The tortures used by the Ungernovtsy were similar to those used by the Chekists, and not to those used in Buddhist images.

Ignorance in the field of Buddhism and propaganda against this religion in J. R. R. Tolkien. Palmer's ideas generally fit the style of Stalinist and Maoist defeats of religions in the USSR, Mongolia, and the PRC. Unfortunately, this is not a metaphor: I have read very similar "arguments"in the sources. The CCP's official propaganda comes to mind because the author lives in Beijing. However, in the Epilogue, J. Palmer, contrary to communist propaganda, objectively describes the repression in Mongolia, including against religion, and draws reasonable parallels with the situation in Tibet after its occupation by China...

There are many minor flaws in the book, such as accusations and harsh words that are not always deserved. It is unlikely that the author of the book would have liked them if they were addressed to him: "the bloody white baron "(title), who experiences "the joy of killing"," the marauder with bloody hands "(p. 2)," the monster "(p. 19), etc.; Nicholas II "the extreme fool" (p. 102the government of the Russian Empire - " the tsarist regime "(p. 34) (just like in red propaganda); Krauthoff's book - "a trashy novel" (p.243). The surname Ungern-Sternberg is discussed in strange discourses (p. 11, 12). The author repeatedly plays up the surname of B. P. Rezukhin and R. F. Ungern: "Rezun". However, his knowledge of the Russian language does not exclude certain mistakes: Zagorsk instead of Zagorsky, Special Manchurian division instead of Special Manchurian detachment, Evtina instead of Evtin, Dutova instead of Dutov, Bakich instead of Bakich, Guzino Lake instead of Goose Lake (p. 75, 96, 175, 176, 215).

In general, the reviewed book, unfortunately, should be recognized as an ideologized propaganda work with numerous errors in facts and interpretations, but not a scientific source. One can feel sorry for Western readers who, for the most part, do not know Russian or Mongolian, and are tempted by a flood of laudatory reviews, try to use this book as a historical guide. I would like to hope that someday the author, abandoning stereotypes and misconceptions, will rewrite it again, correcting mistakes and making it more balanced.

list of literature

Dalai Lama XIV Tsnzin Gyatso. The Heart Sutra: The Teachings of Prajnaparamita. Elista: Oksana Mudosti Publ., 2008.

Darsvskaya E. M. Three portraits - three destinies: historical essays. Ulaanbaatar: Агиймаа. 1997.

Zheleznyakov A. S. Mongol Pole of the Political Structure of the World, Moscow: Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2009.

Kuzmin S. L. (comp.). Baron Ungern in Documents and Memoirs, Moscow: KMK, 2004(1).

Kuzmin S. L. (comp.). The legendary baron. Unknown Pages of the Civil War, Moscow: KMK, 2004(2).

Kuzmin S. L. Hidden Tibet. History of Independence and Occupation, St. Petersburg: A. Tsrsntsva Publishing House, 2010.

Kuzmin S. L. Istoriya barona Ungerna: opyt rekonstruktsii [The History of Baron Ungern: reconstruction Experience]. Moscow: KMK, 2011.

Kuzmin S. L., Oyunchimeg Zh. The last Great Khan of Mongolia / / Asia and Africa today. 2009. № 1.

Kuzmin S. L., Reit L. Zapiski F. A. Ossndovsky as a source on the history of Mongolia / / Vostok (Oriens). 2008. № 5.

Нямаа Б., Ганболд Г. Монголын хоер торийн монгон тэмдэгт (1921 он). Улаанбаатар: Адмон, 2007.

Sukhova O. 2006. Rebellion and submission. Social psychology of the Great Russians in the revolution of 1905-1907. 2006. № 7.

Alioshin D. Asian Odyssey. London-Toronto- Melbourne Sydney: Cassell and Co., Ltd., 1941.

Ossendowski F. 1922. Beasts, Men and Gods. 1922 // http://www.gutcnbcrg.org/filcs/2067/2067-h/2067-h. htm

Ribo N.M. [Рябухин H.M.] The Story of Baron Ungern Told by His Staff Physician. Hoover Institution, Stanford University, CSUZXX697-A.

Permanent link to this publication: