The historical and cultural monuments of Kyrgyzstan from the 18th to 19th centuries did not arise in a vacuum; their roots go deep into the past, reflecting the centuries-old history of the people.
Historical and cultural monuments cannot be considered outside the context of the general historical background and the socio-economic situation of the local population at that specific time. The issues of political and socio-economic history of Kyrgyzstan in the late 18th to 19th centuries have already been sufficiently developed in Soviet historiography. They trace deep ancient traditions of the Kyrgyz people and the local origins of many of its elements. The examination of fortifications and cult architecture, as well as folk and mining crafts, and decorative applied arts allows us to conclude that the material culture of the Kyrgyz people has its origins in antiquity and the Middle Ages, naturally continuing the cultural traditions of numerous nomads who lived at different times on the territory of Kyrgyzstan—from the Saka, Usun, and Huns to the Turks and Mongols. At the same time, it contains a number of elements that bring it closer to the culture of the peoples of Central Asia. All of this convincingly indicates that the Kyrgyz ethnicity formed precisely in the Tian Shan mountains based on the autochthonous local tribes and tribal unions, which came into contact with and sometimes assimilated with tribes of Central Asian and Southern Siberian origin, from where the very ethnonym "Kyrgyz" was introduced, acquiring a broader ethnopolitical significance.
The material culture of the Kyrgyz people was distinctly influenced by the nomadic lifestyle and patriarchal domestic structure. Overall, in its main features, it was deeply original and unified across the entire territory inhabited by the Kyrgyz, although certain local peculiarities were present. A special examination of fortifications shows that their construction, although it intensified with the Kokand colonization in the late 18th to early 19th centuries, was by no means solely a result of it (as was believed quite recently). Recent expeditionary work and a more careful reading of archival materials and other primary sources convincingly demonstrate, firstly, that there were already fortifications in Kyrgyzstan before the Kokand fortresses, and secondly, that Kyrgyz fortresses (albeit smaller in size) existed alongside the Kokand ones, serving as residences for the Kyrgyz feudal nobility.
The construction of cult architecture was, on one hand, an endeavor independent of the Kokand rulers (the construction of traditional Kyrgyz burial mausoleums—gumbazes), and on the other hand, it was stimulated and even forcibly imposed by the Kokand rulers to spread and consolidate Islam in the nomadic environment of the Kyrgyz (mosques and madrasas). And while gumbazes were a widespread phenomenon throughout Kyrgyzstan, having only minor local variations, mosques and madrasas during the Kokand period were found only in the southern regions of Kyrgyzstan, closest to the Islamic centers of the khanate, while in the central regions of the Tian Shan and northern Kyrgyzstan, they were completely absent: Islam had not yet deeply rooted itself here.
The folk applied and decorative arts, housing, and clothing of the Kyrgyz people were distinctive, and the peculiarities of their habitat—the high mountain ranges of the Tian Shan—determined the local population's engagement in mining crafts.
Due to the absence of its own written literature and historical chronicles among the Kyrgyz people before the revolution, information about all this is drawn from folklore and the monumental heroic epic "Manas," as well as from Eastern narrative sources in Uzbek, Tajik, and Chinese languages. However, a certain type of source has survived, represented by material monuments—these are fortifications, architectural and cult structures, and objects of material culture that help recreate vivid pictures of the historical and cultural past of the Kyrgyz people.
One might ask: is it worth studying the Kokand fortresses, which served the purposes of suppressing the Kyrgyz population, and the mosques and madrasas that were instruments of spiritual enslavement of the local population by Islam?
It is indisputable that the monuments of fortification and cult architecture that arose and existed during the feudal period served the interests of the ruling class. They catered to khans, feudal lords, and the Muslim clergy, and often belonged to representatives of the exploiting nobility—which is generally characteristic of all unjust, class-based societies. Nevertheless, this does not exclude or diminish their historical and cultural significance as monuments of the past. They were built by the labor of ordinary people, embodying the centuries-old experience of folk craftsmen and artisans, the manifestation of reason and talent, and the spirit of the people.
While admiring the mausoleum "Gur-e Amir" and other burial sites of the feudal nobility in Samarkand, we often do not even think about or know those in whose honor they were erected. But we cannot help but bow before the labor and exquisite artistry of those simple craftsmen from the people, whose names history has not preserved, yet they themselves have maintained an unshakeable memory of themselves through majestic architectural ensembles. And the gumbaz of "Manas" attracts us not as the burial site of the obscure Kanizek-khatun—the daughter of emir Abuki—but as an architectural monument associated by the people with the memory of their hero—the defender Manas, as a creation of the popular genius.
The Kokand fortresses were a testament to the freedom-loving spirit of the Kyrgyz people, who successfully fought against the khan's oppression and the despotism of local feudal lords (otherwise, why would the conquerors have built these fortresses?). The ruined walls and towers of the fortress walls are not just clay walls and collapsed blocks—they are the result of the struggle of the Kyrgyz people against the invaders, memorial sites of our ancestors' battles for freedom and independence.
The cult structures—madrasas and mosques, which existed during the period of Kokand rule only in southern Kyrgyzstan and did not spread to the northern regions—also testify to the degree of spread and resistance to Islam among the Kyrgyz population. Created and adorned by folk architects, they represent a page in the art and architecture of the people. They reflect the artistic tastes of the people, sometimes even in contrast to the orthodox canons of Islam, which stands out as a strong point.
However, it should be remembered that despite the significance of the monuments of the past, on one hand, we should not forget that they speak of khans and feudal lords, serving as carriers of religious delusion; on the other hand, we should not fall into extremes and idealize all cultural heritage, especially in attempts to idealize the role of Islamic and other cult institutions in the development of folk culture. We should not get carried away by purely professional assessments in the promotion of monuments, nor forget the role, for example, of cult monuments in the ideological struggle of the past and present, taking into account their ideological content, utilitarian-practical orientation, and functional purpose.
All this indicates that we must approach the evaluation of ancient monuments differentially, as relics of their time, and we should neither diminish nor idealize their significance. But what truly constitutes the cultural heritage of the people requires constant study, careful attention, and widespread promotion, for "only a system that has no future does not value either the past or the present."
Every nation wants to say as much about itself as possible not only in the present but also in the past..."
"...And the past life will again arise before the eyes of the living."
