Igor Dyakonov

Picture of Igor Dyakonov

Date of Birth: 01/12/1915

Age: 84

Place of birth: St. Petersburg

Citizenship: Russia


Igor Mikhailovich was born in Petrograd on January 12, 1915 (December 30, 1914, old style). His father, Michael A. Deacons, worked for a time bank clerk, his mother, Maria Pavlovna, he was a doctor. Childhood Igor Mikhailovich had to hunger and difficult years of revolution and civil war, the family lived in poverty. Igor Mikhailovich had two brothers, Michael Sr., with whom Igor Mikhailovich subsequently sometimes worked together, and the younger, Alexey. Since 1922 to 1929 Dyakonova family with small breaks he lived near Oslo, Norway. Father Igor, Michael A., worked in the Soviet trade mission as chief of the financial department and the deputy trade representative. Little Igor quickly learned Norwegian, and later German, which is well held by his mother, and English. The school Deacons first went to Norway, but only in 13 years. In Norway, Igor Mikhailovich was fond of history of the Ancient East and astronomy in the 10 years trying to understand Egyptian hieroglyphics, and to 14 years finally chose East. In 1931, Igor Mikhailovich graduated from the Soviet school in Leningrad. While the education system conducted an experiment "brigade-laboratory method" of teaching - ordinary activities was not, under pain of dismissal of the teacher feared conduct classical lessons. Students mainly engaged in the creation of wall newspapers, social work and amateur performances. Serious knowledge in school can not be obtained, and had to rely on self-study.

After graduation Igor Mikhailovich worked for a year at the Hermitage, as well as doing paid transfers. By this he was forced to make a hard financial situation of the family and the desire to Dyakonova go to university, it was easier to do with the workplace. In 1932, he barely managed to enter the Institute of History and Philology (later to become part of the Leningrad State University). In the early thirties, the university took not the result of the exams, and on personal data. Diakonoff managed to get on a waiting list and a full-fledged student, he was only after deductions from workers` school students free enough space. The university at the time taught such famous scientists as the linguist Nikolai Marr, orientalists Jushmanov Nicholas, Alexander Riftin, Ignatius Krachkovskii, Vasily Struve, Orientalist and Africanist Dmitry Olderogge and others. Alexander Pavlovich Riftin has long been a scientific leader Dyakonova and Academician Vasily Vasilyevich Struve at Dyakonova have a very difficult relationship with the youth.

In 1936, the Deacons married classmate Nina Yakovlevna Magaziner, later became a scholar and literary critic. Since 1937, in parallel with studies he worked at the Hermitage - it was necessary to feed the family. In general, youth Igor M. Dyakonov took place in the years of Stalinist repression. Memories of a scientist draws a terrible picture of systematic arrests and comprehensive fear among Leningrad intellectuals. Some classmates Dyakonova were arrested, some, fearing arrest, have themselves become the informer of the NKVD and systematically wrote informing on his comrades (Assyriologists Of the two who studied with IM, survived only Liping Lev. Another Ierihovich, was shot. Later Leo A. and Igor Mikhailovich publicly reproached each other in his death). In 1938 Dyakonova father was arrested on an official sentence of 10 years without the right of correspondence. In fact, Michael A. was shot a few months after his arrest in 1938, but the family found out about it only after a few years, many years keeping the hope that Michael A. still alive. In 1956 Dyakonova father was exonerated for lack of evidence. Himself Igor Mikhailovich repeatedly invited to the NKVD for questioning about classmates. For example, one of the classmates Dyakonova, which Igor Mikhailovich testified in 1939, was later known historian Lev Gumilyov, who spent 15 years in the camps. Dyakonova father in law was also arrested in 1938, but survived. Despite all the difficulties, despite the fact that the Deacons was the "son of the enemy of the people", he continued to study. Igor Mikhailovich loved his subjects, enjoyed listening to the lectures of many professors who worked at the time at LSU. He studied Yiddish, Arabic, Hebrew, Akkadian, Greek and other languages.

In 1941, the Deacons as Hermitage employee was mobilized for the evacuation of collections. Then, at the end of June 1941, the Hermitage staff packed up and sent to the Urals more than one million priceless exhibits. Deacons worked under the guidance of the famous Egyptologist and art historian Milica Mathieu and packed one of eastern collections. At the insistence of the head of the party organization of the Hermitage, Deacons, despite the white ticket on sight, he enlisted in the militia. Thanks to the knowledge of the German language was enrolled in the intelligence, but not stayed there due to poor form. He was a translator in the Department of Propaganda of the Karelian Front, where he wrote and printed leaflets, he participated in the interrogation of prisoners. In 1944, the Deacons took part in the offensive of the Soviet troops in Norway and was appointed deputy commandant of the city of Kirkenes. Residents spoke about the activities of Dyakonova with gratitude, a deacon in the 1990s, he became an honorary citizen of the city of Kirkenes. During the war, he killed his younger brother, Alexey Dyakonov.

Deacons was demobilized in 1946 and returned to his university. His scientific adviser, Aleksandr Pavlovich Riftin, died in 1945, and deacons became the assistant of the department of Semitic studies, which was in charge of JH Vinnikov. Igor Mikhailovich quickly defended his thesis on land relations in Assyria and taught. In 1950, one of the graduates of the department wrote a denunciation, which indicated that the Department of Talmud study. The chair is closed, dismissing almost all teachers, including Igor Mikhailovich. Deacons returned to work at the Hermitage. After the reorganization of the Institute of Oriental Studies, he began to work in his Leningrad branch. The range of his work spread to completely different areas of ancient history. In collaboration with MM Dyakonov and VA Livshits he transcribed documents from Nisa Parthian. In 1952, in collaboration with Dyakonov IM and YM Dunaevskaya Magaziner published a unique comparative study of Babylonian, Assyrian and Hittite laws [1]. In 1956 he published a book on the history of the Medes and then continued to cooperate with the Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan, together with his brother Michael. In 1963 he published all known at that time Urartian texts on clay tablets [2].

Sumerology for Igor Mikhailovich Dyakonov was one of the main directions of his scientific work, the subject of his master`s and doctoral theses, but this is where the contribution Dyakonova possibly ambiguous and has a number of contentious and controversial moments.

In 1959 he published a fundamental monograph "Public and political system of ancient Mesopotamia. Schumer "in a year that is protected as a thesis for the degree of doctor of historical sciences. This work gives the Deacons own concept of the structure of the Sumerian society and socio-political history of Mesopotamia in the Sumerian period, and criticized all previous historians Sumerologists concept: adopted Soviet science in the mid-1930s. concept VV Struve and adopt Western science concept A.Daymelya.

In the classic textbook Struve, whose ideas concisely outlines Deacons, "from the primitive community deduced the existence of the ancient East community (rather than individual) slavery and despotism of the king; because the irrigation system was the work of the community, to the extent private ownership of land arose only ... high fields, which it was impossible to irrigate "[3]. A.Daymel is believed that all of the economy of the Sumerian city-states should be considered as belonging to the temple, the king`s household, and his view was supported by authoritative Sumerologist A.Falkenshteyn [4].

The monograph by IM Dyakonov both these concepts were rejected. Calculate the total irrigated area of ??the state of Lagash and comparing this amount to the temple land area of ??Bau, the researcher concluded that "a significant portion of land in Lagash lying outside the temple lands," and temple management "covers all the same, probably, only a part of the free and slave population of Lagash and took away not all treated area of ??the state "[5]. Struve concept of private land ownership in the "high field" Dyakonov was challenged on the basis of the following arguments: on the non-irrigated land in a tropical dry bread can not grow [3].

As a result of his research Deacons came to the conclusion that there are two major sectors of the Sumerian economy: land bolshesemeynyh community and temple land. Sumer population was inscribed in the economic structure and is divided into four strata: large know, possessed large tracts of land and had the opportunity to buy land in the property; freemen who owned land in the order of family and community ownership; customers (the former community members who have lost their communal ties); slaves (the church and individuals).

The main productive force of Sumerian society Deacons, as opposed to Struve, believes not slaves and freemen, and partly of customers. The political system of Sumer considered it as a permanent struggle for power between the community and the tsarist-temple political groups and political history of the Sumerian state is divided into three phases: the struggle of the king and the aristocratic oligarchy; the emergence of despotism in the Akkadian period and the fight for its consolidation; victory despotic regime during the Ur III [5].

On the concept of Dyakonova had a significant impact on the work T.Yakobsena early political history of Mesopotamia [6]. Therefore, it has been well received by American Sumerology, in particular, SN Kramer, which is based on "careful and creative research Dyakonova `own essay device Sumerian city. [7]

Some contributions made Deacons, and the study of the Sumerian language. He wrote a number of articles about the ergative construction proposals of numerals [8]. Since the 90s in Sumerology revived the search for typology, and in the future, possibly, genetically close to the Sumerian language. In 1991. R. Iosivara in his monograph Sumerian contrasted with the Japanese [9] and in 1996. PK Manansala published his arguments involving both phonetic and morphological and lexical data in favor of the relationship with the Sumerian language astroneziyskoy group, where he has included, in addition to Munda, and even Japan. [10]. A year after the publication of Manansaly Dyakonov continued support of the hypothesis of relationship of the Sumerian language and the languages ??of the Munda group: were similar, apart from a few dozen names, some of the terms of kinship and declensional indicators. [11]. Of interest is the fact that it is on the comparison of the Sumerian language with the Munda languages ??converge position Dyakonov and his implacable opponent Kifishin. However, a comparison with the Munda proved not the best move for either Kifishin nor Dyakonova: In 2001, enough strong arguments in favor of the relationship with the Sino-Tibetan language group (especially starotibetskim language) put Ian Brown (337 lexical correspondences, in t .ch. indicators of the 1st and 2nd person singular pronouns, numerals, the designation of the body parts and kinship terms, phonemic analysis of correspondences between the Sumerian and starotibetskim, word formation and morphology of cells). In 2004 he added a list of lexical correspondences to 341 th, issued a list of the main homonyms and synonyms between the Sumerian and the Sino-Tibetan language group, as well as a list of registered prefixes, which coincide in these languages. [12] About Brown comparative studies of IM Deacons mentions in 1967 still in the language of the ancient Asia Minor.

A variety of scientific activities Igor M. Dyakonov allowed him to make a major contribution to comparative linguistics. Several of his works claim the fundamental nature in this area. Among them:

Afro-Asiatic languages. Previous classification., Moscow, 1965

Languages ??of ancient Asia Minor., Moscow 1967

(With A. Belov and A. Yu Militarev) Comparative-Historical Dictionary Afro-Asiatic languages, Moscow 1981-1982

Afrasian Languages, Nauka, Moscow, 1988

(Jointly with SA Starostin) Hurrians, Urartu and Eastern Caucasian languages ??// Ancient East: Ethno-cultural communication, Moscow, 1988

Igor Mikhailovich was also interested in issues of deciphering ancient scripts and contributed to the publication in Russian of a number of fragments and fragments of the advanced works on the history of the letter, which came up with its detailed comments on the current state of the question. In addition, the deacon is the author of the following linguistic hypotheses:

(Jointly with SA Starostin) on the relationship with the Etruscan language Hurrian language

on the relationship of the Sumerian language with languages ??Munda

Due to its diverse research Igor M. Dyakonov published several fundamental generalizing works on the history. Among them:

(Together with other authors) History of the Ancient East, "Nauka", Moscow, 1983-1988

The archaic myths of East and West, Moscow, 1990. Many specialists in neighboring fields of knowledge, particularly among Egyptologists, this work is not made a positive response. Among the opposition direction Assyriologists (Kifishin, Vassoevich Svyatopolk-Chetvertynsky) it has caused a profound aversion primarily due to the overly inflated materialist-positivist approach to the problems of the spiritual plane.

Way history: from ancient man to the present day, "Eastern Literature", Moscow, 1994

However, the last book of Igor Mikhailovich himself calls "adventure" [3], and, indeed, it has caused serious criticism by some historians [13]. On the other hand, some researchers consider this book an outstanding achievement of the scientist [14].

Although the history of the ancient Iranian peoples and the study of texts written in the Iranian language, can not be considered a central area of ??research IM Dyakonov, its contribution to the Iranian studies can not be considered too conservative. His work in this area can be characterized quite laconic phrase "through the prism of Iranian Studies Semitic":

From 1948 to the beginning of the 1950s. during excavations under the direction of E. Masson at the settlements of New and Old Nisa, located not far from Ashgabat and are Mihrdadkerta ruins, one of the capitals of the Parthian Empire (III century BC -... III century AD...) was found more than two thousand documents on potsherds ( "Ostrakov"), wrote a letter to the Aramaic origin. The archaeological context and the wording of the same type of documents saying that the found texts - commercial records relating to wine storage. A number of Aramaic words in the documents was immediately clear to the skilled person. However, the question arose arc: the language written Ostrakov? For the majority of Middle-scripts (sredneperidskoy, Parthian, Sogdian, Khorezm) was characterized by Aramaic ideograms, that is, for a number of tokens to prescribe the Aramaic word (often distorted), but read the Iranian equivalent (cf.. Kanji in modern Japanese, shumerogrammy in Akkadian). Semitic I. Vinnikov attempted to read documents in Aramaic, [15], while IM Dyakonov, his older brother, historian and expert on Iran and the Deacons MM Iranist linguist VA Livshits [16 ] understand documents as a Parthian, but written with a very large number of Aramaic ideograms - this is indicated by irregular writing Aramaic words, non-Semitic inscriptions syntax faults in ideographic and "disclosed" the writing of a number of tokens. Viewpoint Dyakonova and Livshits has been supported by the largest Iranian scholars of that time VB Henning [17] and is now universally accepted. In 1960, IM Dyakonov and VA Livshits posted solid sample documents [18], and since 1976 is gradually coming to a complete English edition of the series Corpus Inscriptionum Iranicarum (to date, all photos are published, transliteration and translation inscriptions, glossary).

In 1956, commissioned by the Institute of History of Azerbaijan SSR I. Dyakonov he published "History of Media" [19], as he himself said, "to make extra money." In chetyrehsotstranichnoy monograph cover fully the question of history, historical geography, ethnic history, archeology north-eastern outskirts of Mesopotamia and the north-western Iran since ancient times, date, direction, character infiltration of Indo-Iranian tribes in these areas (deacon in the "Media History" advocated relatively late, c VIII in. BC. e., the penetration of Iranian Plateau from Central Asia, but in the future and recognized the possibility of an earlier date), the political history of the Median power VII-VI centuries., the conquest of the Medes and Persians Media history as part of the Achaemenid state until the conquests of Alexander the Great. This work required the analysis not only familiar Diakonoff ancient eastern sources, but also Greek and Roman writings, ancient Iranian monuments; and those, and others in the book masterfully peruse. "History of Media" has been translated into Persian and withstood several reprints in Iran [20]. Peru belongs Dyakonova and a section on the history of the Medes in the "Cambridge History of Iran" [21]

It is very important to a small article Dyakonova "Eastern Iran to Cyrus (the possibility of new productions issue)" [22], where the author offered his vi & # 769; denie chronological and geographical localization of Zarathushtra activities. Based on the concise analysis of the entire complex language, written and archaeological sources, the author concludes that Zoroaster lived within the VII century. BC. e. in Bactria, it causes additional arguments in favor of penetration of Iranian tribes on the Iranian Plateau izStepnogo Belt across Central Asia.

Historical and philosophical ideas Dyakonova most consistently described in such works as "Kirkenes Ethics" (1944), "The archaic myths of East and West" (1990), "Ways of stories from ancient man to the present day" (1994), "The book of memories "(1995). HISTORIOSOPHY Dyakonova is located at the junction of the Marxist theory of socio-economic formations and French positivism (Comte), rising to Bacon, Descartes and Spinoza. He distinguishes eight phases of the social structure (the primitive, the primitive, early antiquity, imperial antiquity, the Middle Ages, a stable post-medieval-absolutist, capitalist and post-capitalist), and the reason for the transition from one phase to the other considers the improvement of weapons technology. However, such a transition is not leaps and bounds, and its mechanism are the changes that occur in social psychology under the influence new developments of military industry. Thus, to better understand the history of each phase should be equally studied and its material base, and a system of values ??that occurs in the process of development of public relations at various levels.

Deacons assesses the future of humanity is very pessimistic; He pays special attention to the problems of exhaustion of natural energy resources, overpopulation and the violation of biological equilibrium in the world. A powerful tool to sustain life on the planet he believes science, special hopes thus to controlled nuclear fusion and the use of solar radiation. In social terms, in order to best survival all societies of the world will have to gradually move into the post-capitalist phase of development, and advanced civilizations will have them in this way we can. Objecting to the positivists, Deacons skeptical of the idea of ??progress: "If in one place came something else departed," so there is no development without a loss, and hence the absolute progress is impossible.

Ethical Considerations Dyakonova arose under the influence of Darwin`s evolutionary doctrine, they are in contact with the ethics of Protestantism and religious and atheist philosophies that do not recognize God as a person. In place of God here is the conscience that Dyakonov considers inherent to each person and determine the biological survival of the species (the kind where the majority of the altruists, survives, as the life of the form is objectively more important than the life of one individual; on the contrary, the type consisting of a selfish, rapidly dying out, because it no one cares about the interests of the whole). The categorical imperative for Diakonoff not multiply the world`s evil, avoid it altogether if man is by nature can not.

The theory is based on the myth Dyakonova objective psychology achievements (in particular - on the discoveries of psycho-physiologists school Sherrington). Myth is here understood as a coherent interpretation of the phenomena of the world, organizes the perception of a person in the absence of abstract concepts. The origin of the myth is obliged to processes occurring in the cortex of the brain and central nervous system (TN. "Sherringtonova funnel"), when there is an inadequate reaction of the authorities in the processing of information: some impressions of the outside world, not finding reflection in the social experience, transformed consciousness man in the path - a subject-shaped matching events, perceived as the identification and association; other information, consistent with experience, is transformed into a cause-effect relationship.

Deacons did not leave the works in the field of religion, but his views are set out in a number of recent works historiosophical. The source of religious ideas Dyakonov considers motivation (motivation) of human activity, which under the rule of the mythological consciousness regarded as causal relationships defined deity will. Deity to determine the nature of the archaic human causal relationships and thus the possibility or impossibility to meet the social motives. Deity, as an explanation of the causal link through the trails, is a semantic number. Local pantheons Deacons defines as "the beginning of the causal motivations that are different myths development - semantic series in the narratives about them."

Further development on Diakonoff religion associated with the development of public relations as a result of migration and improvement in the production of weapons. Not believing in the existence of God as a person and expressing doubts as to the existence of an omniscient Supreme Mind, the deacon was talking about the secular nature of the future of human society based on ethical principles set out above.

[Edit] Creating your own assiriologicheckoy school

In March 1988, Deacons received his honorary doctorate from the University of Chicago, where he was named principal investigator of the ancient Near East, who "revived assiriologicheskuyu science alone in the Soviet Union." Indeed, IM Deacons trained many students, among them the world-famous Assyriologists.

Many of them continue to operate in the Gaza Ancient East Institute of Oriental Manuscripts (until recently - Leningrad branch resp St. Petersburg Branch of the Institute of Oriental Studies). There is Dyakonova Memorial Library, donated to the Institute.

Confrontation with academician Struve

Scientific work Dyakonova associated with the Sumerian language was held in opposition to the academician Vasily Vasilyevich Struve, best known at the time of orientalist specialized by Sumerology in the USSR, since 1941 head of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the USSR. Vasily was able in a difficult time of Stalinist repression to maintain good relations with the regime, considered one of the main official Marxist historians. Perhaps this fact has become the main cause of hatred, with which Igor M. Dyakonov, the son was shot in 1938. "Enemy of the people" refers to the academician Struve. In his "Book of Memories" Deacons Struve mentions dozens of times, each time in a negative sense, putting him in guilt, even the tone of voice and body shape. [3] Confrontation with Struve for Dyakonova compounded by the fact that Igor Mikhailovich was a scientist with very diverse interests, wrote the work in different languages ??and cultures, and Struve, doing most of his life (at least since 1911. When finished university) Egyptology, since 1933 firmly focused Sumerology it on, making a special file cabinet. However, Dyakonova very interested in history and Sumerian Sumerian language, he was engaged in research in these areas and has repeatedly tried to find flaws in the theories of Struve or any of these theories develop.

In the early fifties Deacons made a number of articles [23] [24] [25] [26], mainly aimed at the revision of the economic system of Sumer, has long proposed Struve. In its response, [27] Struve argued that the Deacons based their assumptions on an erroneous interpretation of certain Sumerian words. It should be noted that in the modern interpretation of these words is preserved tradition Struve [28].

In the late fifties, the controversy began to wear more personal. It should be noted glaring violations of scientific etiquette by Igor Mikhailovich: from the perspective of the academic table of ranks, he was only a candidate of historical sciences, has entered into a personal confrontation with the academician, since 1941 head of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the USSR, and since 1959 the head of the ancient Eastern Division of the Institute. Struve reproached Dyakonova that he uses in his articles translated Orientalist Shileiko without his authorship [27]. Deacons, in turn, publicly attacked the earliest translations of Struve who Vasily did with the German interlinear and from which long ago abandoned [29] that Struve called "disloyal act" [30].

However, in 1959 Deacons tried to defend his doctoral thesis on his book "The social and political system of ancient Mesopotamia: Sumer", choosing as the opponent was Struve, but Struve made a large number of amendments that Deacons are not accepted and refused to listen to [3 ]. Defended his doctoral thesis Diakonoff help good relations with Bobodzhanov Gafurovich Gafurov, a prominent party leader, former first secretary of the Tajik SSR, and at that time - the director of the Institute of Oriental Studies, who personally asked Struve remove objections (Deacons under the Gafurov organized the XXV International Congress of Orientalists Moscow in 1960, and his brother Mikhail Dyakonov once criticized Gafurov book "History of Tajikistan") [3]. In 1960 Diakonoff successfully defend themselves and to become a doctor of historical sciences, though Struve generally refused to act as opponent. But the fact of violation of academic Dyakonov table of ranks will be remembered by his colleagues and prevent further his climb up the academic ladder.

In 1961, in "Literary Monuments" series came out translation Dyakonova Epic of Gilgamesh [31]. This work brought Diakonoff both success and fame outside of Oriental and murmurings of discontent among scientists in connection with the circumstances surrounding this transfer. During the preparation of the translation Deacons worked with manuscripts Translation "Assyrian-Babylonian epic" made by talented orientalist Vladimir Kazimirovich Shileiko in the twenties - thirties. Influence Shileiko not denied, but there was a discussion on the extent of use of these manuscripts. In the words of the famous Russian philologist Vyacheslav Ivanov Vselovodovicha: "a number of places specified transfer ... almost literally following text Shileiko not only in the rhythm, but in particular the choice of words". [32] Deacons, in his "Book of Memories" confirms that has long worked with the manuscript Shileiko, but claims that it was a "rough and unfinished sketches, often without beginning or end", and that its publication "impracticable" [3] . At the same time, other researchers believe the manuscript "Assyrian-Babylonian epic" finished and ready to be published [33] Moreover, a large part of it was published without further consultation with kakih-libo Assyriologists in 1987 [34].

In addition, relatives Shileiko say that could take away from the manuscript Dyakonova, only resorting to the help of a police officer. [35] Deacons in correspondence with Ivanov pointed out that he was "against exaggerating the dependence of its translation from made Shileiko" and intended to return to this question, but for 12 years, since the release of comments Ivanov, until his death in 1999, Deacons since this issue and did not return. [36]

However, the integrity of the work of IM Dyakonov manuscripts Shileiko points found in the archive of the family Shileiko letter VK Andreeva-Shileiko IM Dyakonov from 23 August 1940 (save the draft), which states: "In your letter you ask, not whether to save in the papers Vladimir Kazimirovich translation of other texts Gilgamesh (in addition to tables VI - VE). Unfortunately not, although Vladimir Kazimirovich were translated all parts of Gilgamesh completely and them about this epic has been prepared a lot of research. But will rock all the materials for this work he lost his Leningrad apartment during your stay in Moscow. Loss of this was a severe blow to my late husband, even though he used to say that to grieve about, because that is not able to complete it, still others will do. And he probably would have rejoiced, finding myself in your face successor ". [37] Thus, from the correspondence implies that the full translation of the Gilgamesh epic was lost during the life of VK Shileiko, and his widow has blessed the young scientist IM Dyakonov out to make a new translation. Point in this debate about the authorship should raise academic publication of the translation Shileiko who survived [37].

Assiriologicheskaya opposition Dyakonova Kifishin in the face in the scientific press has accused Igor Mikhailovich in the other, namely, the translation of the epic of Gilgamesh not Akkadian, and with the German language: "The poem of Gilgamesh ... Translation and interpretation of the text are numerous; let`s call a few of them: [followed by the transfer, including the publication] Schott 1958. On the latter is made and "translation" of the epic of Gilgamesh from German IM Dyakonov (A.Shott not Assyriologist and ordinary writer) "[38 ].

The situation among the Orientalists changed dramatically in 1965, after the death of Struve. Since that time he has already Igor M. Dyakonov became the leading Sumerology - as a result of the war and Stalin`s repressions no longer have a single PhD in this field. There is evidence that the Deacons took a number of steps, so that no one in the Soviet Assyriology could not do other than himself and his own disciples.

Lev Liping was forced to leave the Institute, and lost the opportunity to be published in 1965. Deacons in his memoirs, accuses Lipina in secret collaboration with the NKVD and betraying his comrades, as well as criticizing harshly, published anthology Liping Akkadian [3]. On the other hand, the book Lipin "Akkadian language", he published in 1964, even in 1973, was reissued in English. That disciple of Lev Alexandrovich RA Gribov was destined after the death of his colleague and the supervisor L.A.Lipina for twelve years (1970-1982) to become the only university Assyriologist and alone to prepare three of graduates.

Rostislav Antonovich mushrooms, Ph.D., serial Struveists, scientific secretary of the department of history of the Ancient East, East St. Petersburg State University. For a quarter century, Mushroom has been the de facto leader of the department and the best Russian teachers in the field of Assyriology, only in the USSR university professors Akkadian and Sumerian languages. Russian Assyriologists in Leningrad was obtained from Gribova assiriologicheskoe vocational education. Known act of scientific and civic courage on the part of R.A.Gribova was peremptory results support decryption proto-Sumerian Stone Tomb petroglyphs undertaken A.G.Kifishinym in the second half of the 90s, in spite of the sharp rejection of these results Dyakonov [1]

Anatoly G. Kifishin last student VV Struve, and Tagged Dyakonova characteristic of his "personal enemy" had to defend his thesis in 1966, but did not do so because of the death of a teacher for a month before a