Paper long abstract:

The first inscription of the Manas epic on UNESCO list of intangible heritage in 2009 sparked heated debates between patrons of the epic on the two sides of Kyrgyzstan-China border. At that time, Kyrgyzstanis did not hesitate to strongly doubt the authenticity of China’s 18-volume-long version of the epic and to harshly criticize the legitimacy and skills of China’s bard Jusup Mamay. Nine years later, however, Kyrgyzstan officially celebrated the 100th anniversary of the same Jusup Mamay and placed him in the pantheon of the Manas epic side by side with the nation’s two iconic bards, Saghymbay and Sayakbay .

In this paper I analyze Kyrgyzstanis’ changing narratives on Jusup Mamay and the light these narratives shed on the never-ending definitions of the “proper” epic and the “traditional” bard. I argue that the adoption and celebration of Jusup Mamay in Kyrgyzstan became possible by shifting the focus from his legitimacy as an epic performer to his perseverance as a custodian of Kyrgyz epic heritage. I suggest that such a shift offers a favourable ground for addressing once again the longstanding tension between “epic as (a living) tradition” and “epic as (an objectified) heritage” and assessing the complex relationship between current and past instrumentalizations of this tension.