Search

In the present paper we analysed in a historical perspective the formation of the key concepts concerning the military actions in the North-Western Caucasus of the 19th century in Russian, Turkish and Western historiography. We didn't set before ourselves the task to find out, “what really happened in the western North Caucasus”, but rather how actually “what happened in the western North Caucasus” is interpreted in different historiographical traditions. Our study has shown that Russian, Turkish and Western historiography on the North-Western Caucasus of the 19th century so strongly depends on local traditions that we can say about three separate historiographies. Current situation is noticeable for the development of Circassian ‘auto-historiography’ which is characterised by ethnocentrism and victimisation due to the trends of counter-history. In spite of interaction between Russian, Turkish and Western historiographies, each of them was formed according to own logic of development. Thus, the misunderstandings in the terminology on the North-Western Caucasus of the 19th century (in particular, with the term ‘Caucasian War’) lean on the differences of historiographical traditions leading to the conflicts of interpretations.