Статья 'Создание черкесской письменности в России и Турции в контексте нациестроительства (XIX – начало XX вв.)' - журнал 'Человек и культура' - NotaBene.ru
по
Journal Menu
> Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the Journal > Requirements for publication > Editorial collegium > Editorial board > Peer-review process > Policy of publication. Aims & Scope. > Article retraction > Ethics > Online First Pre-Publication > Copyright & Licensing Policy > Digital archiving policy > Open Access Policy > Article Processing Charge > Article Identification Policy > Plagiarism check policy
Journals in science databases
About the Journal

MAIN PAGE > Back to contents
Man and Culture
Reference:

Creation of Circassian written language in Russia and Turkey in the context of nation-building (XIX – early XX century)

Tsibenko Veronika

PhD in History

Director, Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities of Southern Federal University

105/42 Bolshaya Sadovaya Str., Rostov-on-Don, 344006, Russia

tsibenkovv@sfedu.ru
Pogulyaeva Elena

Junior Scientific Associate, Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities of Southern Federal University

105/42 Bolshaya Sadovaya Str., Rostov-on-Don, 344006, Russia

epogulyaeva@sfedu.ru

DOI:

10.25136/2409-8744.2022.1.37505

Received:

04-02-2022


Published:

11-02-2022


Abstract: The subject of this research is the creation of Circassian written language in the Russian and Ottoman Empires. Based on the theory of the British scholar M. Billing, this article demonstrates that the process of creation of writing was an integral part of Circassian nation-building during the XIX – early XXI century in the conditions of the absence of own national state. The study leans on the historical, ethnographic and linguistic works of the Russian researchers of that time period, materials of the Circassian newspaper "Guaze" published in the Ottoman Empire at in the early XX century, and the research results of the Soviet, Russian, and foreign (including Turkish) scholars. The Circassian case was taken as an example for several reasons: Circassians are currently undergoing an active phase of nation-building; they live in their historical homeland (North Caucasus) and in diaspora (mainly Turkey); they feature competitive national projects, which allows tracing the dependence of linguistic processes on the national processes. It is established that the creation of writing has become an important phase of Circassian nation-building. In the conditions of interaction with the Russian and Ottoman society, Circassians started to develop their own written language; however, depending on their living conditions and sociopolitical situation, they chose different alphabets, which were perceived as cultural orientation. Writing was developed by Circassians for different languages: universal Adyghe or Kabardian in Russia, universal Adyghe, Adyghe-Abkhaz-Abaza, universal Caucasian, Ubykh in Turkey; different dialects were compiled accordingly. These first attempts of creating written language, which were largely of external nature in Russia, which laid the groundwork for the subsequent variative development of the development of Circassian nationalism that manifests in the command of native languages by the Circassians in Caucasus and diaspora, as well as in communication between Russian and Turkish Circassians.


Keywords:

writing, alphabet, nation-building, language building, Adyghe, Circassians, Caucasians, North Caucasus, Russian Empire, Ottoman Empire

This article is automatically translated. You can find original text of the article here.

Today it seems indisputable that the emergence of natural languages took place at the dawn of human history. People, as a rule, learn their native language from childhood and use it in many areas of their lives. Language is a necessary communication tool, and its main function is communicative.

Nevertheless, the national and international languages known to us (for example, English, French, German, etc.) appeared much later than natural languages as such, and the reason for this is not only the historical internal development of these languages, but also extra-linguistic factors that the founder of structuralism in linguistic science F. de Saussure called it "external linguistics". To these factors F. de Saussure counted, in particular, political and geographical, including territorial changes of states and the fragmentation of languages into dialects [1, p. 40-43]. At the same time, the boundaries between dialects have a conventional nature and are always conditional precisely because they are closely related to external processes.

British scientist Michael Billig has put forward a theory according to which the modern concepts of "language" and "dialect" originated in the same era as the concepts of nations and nation-states. Billig writes that in the Middle Ages, people did not have a clear idea that they spoke a certain language, since there was no literary norm – some adverbs smoothly flowed into others within a single state and between states. Literary languages began to be established as emerging States, which were to become national, sought to use the language factor to construct nations. In accordance with the ideology of nationalism, which M. Billig considers to be the driving force behind the functioning of these concepts, only those nations that speak their own languages have the right to create their own states. As a result, in the era of nationalism, the concept of dialect appeared, which "justified" the absence of independent states for those groups that did not have developed national languages [2].

In the light of M. Billig's theory, it is interesting to consider the linguistic processes of those groups that, having no national states, develop their own national projects. This will allow us to study in more detail the relationship of the modern language with nation-building. Of the many possible options for conducting the study, we chose the Circassian case as promising for our topic in several respects. Firstly, the Circassians are currently experiencing an active phase of nation-building. Secondly, they live in their historical homeland (the Russian North Caucasus) and in the diaspora (mainly in Turkey), which makes this material more interesting. Thirdly, they have a whole complex of competing national projects: all-Caucasian, all-Adyghe, Adygo-Abkhazian, Kabardian, Adyghe and several other less common versions, which makes it possible to more clearly trace the dependence of linguistic processes on national ones. In this article, we will limit ourselves to considering only one aspect of a broad linguistic problem – the creation of writing.

We will begin by mentioning that the concept of the Circassian language, accepted in Soviet and Russian science, is radically different from the understanding of the native language in the Circassian diaspora. Prior to the beginning of the process of annexation of the Caucasus to the Russian Empire, no attempts were made to scientifically describe the languages that existed here, which did not fall into the field of view of professional linguists. Local languages have not formed their own written language, preserving the cultural heritage in oral form. Arabic was mainly used for written communication, although there are isolated examples of writing letters in local dialects using Arabic letters. In particular, the first recorded case refers to the second half of the XVIII century. [3, s. 181-182].

The first variants of the Adyghe alphabets began to appear in the Caucasus in the XIX century, and most of the researchers who created them represented the Russian intelligentsia – linguists, ethnographers and military men with noble origins and appropriate education (I. Gracilevsky, L. Lyulye, P. Uslar, L. Lopatinsky). A special category included Caucasians with Russian education and/or in the Russian service, since the need for ethnographic and linguistic descriptions of the Caucasus was closely related to the integration of this region into the Russian Empire. Among them , Sh should be singled out . Nogmova, Sultan Khan-Giray, U. Bersei, K. Atazhukin, P. Tambieva, H. Anchoka, B. Huranova, T. Sheretlukova.

Before the annexation of the Caucasus to Russia, there was only one attempt to create a written language for Circassians, undertaken by Notauk Sheretlukov, who, being a Shapsug nobleman and mullah, had ties with the Ottoman Empire and made the Hajj to Mecca several times [4, 5]. Shora Nogmov, who was engaged in philological, historical and ethnographic studies of the Adygs and compiled several variants written language [6, 7], came from a family of Kabardian Uzden. He was in the service of the Russian government, participated in many military expeditions, and was described as a man who performed his duties perfectly [8].

Another Circassian who served Russia faithfully, wrote the historical and ethnographic work "Notes on Circassia" and compiled his own alphabet [6, p. 95], was Sultan Khan-Giray, the son of a feudal owner who had great influence and voluntarily accepted Russian citizenship. It should be noted that Sultan Khan-Giray served in the "life Guards of the Caucasian-Mountain half-squadron of His Majesty's convoy". It was a squadron of mountaineers who provided the personal protection of the tsar in St. Petersburg [6, pp. 3-41]. There were students of I.V. Grazilevsky, a Russian orientalist who compiled the alphabet of the Circassian language in Cyrillic. Subsequently, the members of the guard corresponded with each other using this alphabet [9]. Sh. Nogmov was also sent there, but he did not have time to take up his duties, as he died some time after arriving in St. Petersburg [8, p. 10].

The famous Adyghe educator Umar Bersei was captured at an early age and sold to Egypt, where he learned Arabic and Ottoman languages [10]. Then he received his education in France [11, pp. 89-90], after which in 1843 he served as an interpreter of Asian languages in the Russian army in the troops of the Caucasian line. In the 1850s and 60s, Bersei "under the influence of advanced Russian pedagogical thought" taught the Adyghe language at the Stavropol gymnasium [12, p. 376].

Many of the researchers we have listed have identified several adverbs of the Adyghe language. Thus, L. Lyulye, who during his service in the Caucasus independently studied the languages that existed there, reports that there are Kabardian, Besleneyev and general Circassian dialects of the "Adiga" language [13, pp. III-XI]. A similar classification is given by L. Lopatinsky, distinguishing the Lower Adyghe (Kyakh - U. Bersei called it "kgyakhabze" [14, p. 22]), Middle Adyghe, or Besleneevo, and Upper Adyghe, or Kabardian dialects. At the same time, he informs that he considers the Kabardian dialect a language, since it is isolated from other dialects, and creates a dictionary for this language [15, pp. I-II]. Another person who described the Kabardian (Kabardino-Circassian) language was K. Atazhukin, who compiled the Kabardian alphabet [16]. Sh. Nogmov also distinguishes Kabardian and Besleneyev dialects, but does not write about some other dialect [17, p. 38]. Sultan Khan-Giray, in turn, reports on the common dialect of Kabardians and Beslineans, contrasting it as purer in relation to the dialect of the "grassroots" Circassians, i.e. all other tribes [6, p. 95].

Anyway, everyone who attempted to create writing for the Adygs before the beginning of the XX century, created the concept of what the Adyghe language is and what adverbs it has, since a scientific description always requires conceptualization of the concept. At the same time, they either constructed a single Adyghe language, or studied the Kabardian (Kabardino-Circassian) language. Nevertheless, they pointed out that the Adyghe language and its dialects have different shades and properties in each tribe [6, 13]. Even P. Uslar, who, unlike others, does not distinguish any adverbs, describing the Circassian language, gives examples of sounds and words from different villages, implying that there are differences between the "languages" of villages [18, pp. 61-74].

Variants of the Circassian script were created not only in the Caucasus, but also in the Ottoman Empire, where the Caucasian diaspora traditionally lived, which increased significantly with the annexation of the Caucasus to Russia. Ottoman attempts to create Circassian writing by influential Circassians integrated into the highest circles of the Ottoman Empire are observed somewhat later than in Russia. Circassian activist Fakhri Khuvazh, who currently lives in Turkey, reports that work on the alphabet and education in his native language was actively carried out in the era of Abdul Hamid II, although this period was marked by the despotic rule of the sultan. Then it was done by those close to the court or those who had a position in the bureaucratic system [19, s. 6]. Thus, in 1897, the Circassian alphabet in Javid Pasha Arabic was published by lithographic method [20, s. 91, 165] (June 30, 1906 Javid Pasha submitted a request for the official registration of his alphabet to the Ministry of Education, which was immediately granted [21, s. 7]), and in 1899 the Circassian newspaper "Ittihad" reported on the development of four types of Caucasian alphabets - Adyghe, Abkhaz—Abaza, Ubykh and Ossetian [22, p. 58].

It should be noted that only Caucasians who did not have a specialized education took part in this, which is explained by the underdevelopment of linguistic science in the Ottoman Empire at that time and the general lack of interest among the Ottomans in local languages and dialects, characteristic of the educational project in the Russian Empire. The possibility of systematic work on the alphabet in the Ottoman Empire appeared after the Young Turk Revolution of 1908. Less than a month after it, the first organization of Caucasians in Turkey, operating on a legal basis, was established in Constantinople — the Circassian Society of Unity and Mutual Assistance (Circassian Ittihat ve Teavyun Jamiyeti), officially registered in November 1908. Due to the fact that in Turkey, the ethnonym "Circassian" in a broad sense means not only the Adygs, but also all people from the Caucasus who profess Islam, the founders of this society included representatives of different ethnic groups. They were closely associated with the Young Turk movement, the basis of which was the military elite. The society set education and the economy as its priorities, which corresponded to the agenda of the Young Turks [23].

One of the main goals of the Circassian Society of Unity and Mutual Assistance was to carry out activities in the cultural and educational sphere: it was planned to open a network of schools for Circassians, create a library in Constantinople, publish its own newspaper and textbooks. In one of the appeals published by the Society, it was said about the need to spread literacy and the written Circassian language [23, p. 40-41].

In 1909 The Society has published a small dictionary of the Circassian language on a Latin basis. Batyray Yedich writes that it could be used as a "national alphabet" [20, S. 166]. Later, in April 1911, the Society began publishing the newspaper "Gouase" (Circa. "bulletin", "landmark"). The role of the Circassian language as part of the historical heritage was updated on the pages of this newspaper. It was stated that the preservation of the language is an expression of respect for the ancestors who gave their lives for their homeland, religion and honor [24, p. 3]. It should be noted that the newspaper "Gyuase", according to the Turkish researcher Elmas Zeynep Arslan, served as an instrument of national mobilization of Circassians [23, p. 56, 161-162]. At the same time, it was published exclusively for those who had a high education and, as Vladimir Hamed-Troyansky points out, belonged to the upper strata of society. This was the second generation of Circassians (after mass migration at the end of the Caucasian War in 1864), which was urbanized and had a national consciousness [25, p. 479].

A short time after the publication of the newspaper "Gazette" (distributed not only in the territory of modern Turkey, but also in Syria, Jordan and the Caucasus) it began to include texts in the Circassian (Kabardian) language. Differences in the conditions for the implementation of Circassian nation-building in Russia and Turkey, related to geographical and socio-political factors, led to the existence of projects in Turkey involving the use of the same alphabets for the Adyghe "dialects" (osm. shiva) and the Abkhaz language [26, s. 4]. In addition, the former Minister of Waqfs and retired diplomat Shamsaddin Pasha compiled an alphabet intended for all North Caucasian "tribes" (osm. kabail) [27, s. 3]. Moreover, Fakhri Khuvazh reports that the author proposed using this alphabet for all existing languages, if such a need arises [19, s. 7].

The period of the late XIX – early XX centuries was marked by the growth of social and educational activities in the Circassian environment and on the territory of the Russian Empire. A "Society for the dissemination of education among Kabardians and Mountaineers of the Nalchik district" appeared in the Caucasus, the purpose of which was education, the formation of national identity and the development of national culture [28]. This society included B. Khuranov [11, p. 272], who created a variant of the Latinized alphabet of the Kabardian language (which began the systematic teaching of this language in schools in the Soviet era), published in 1923 [29, p. 190-191].

In the process of creating Circassian writing, researchers and public figures used different bases — Arabic, Cyrillic and Latin. In the Russian Empire, the Cyrillic alphabet often served as the foundation for obvious reasons, and this corresponded to the goals of creating the Adyghe alphabet – to spread literacy among Circassians in both Adyghe and Russian and integrate them into the Russian environment. The Cyrillic alphabet was taken as a basis by I. Gracilevsky, Sultan Khan-Giray, L. Lyulye, P. K. Uslar, K. Atazhukin, L. G. Lopatinsky, P. Tambiev, T. Sheretlokov [29, 30].

The Arabic basis was used both in Russia and in Turkey due to the religious factor, since most of the Circassians profess Islam. For example, N. Sheretlukov tried to translate Arabic religious literature into the Adyghe language at the beginning of the XIX century, for which he began to compile an Adyghe primer, but this was prevented by the local Muslim clergy [5]. Sh. Nogmov was also engaged in translations from Arabic of "moral books for reading" [31] (according to Khan Giray, he even translated the "Arabic Catechism" into Circassian [6, p. 95]) - his writing variants were both in Arabic and Cyrillic [32].

Arabic was the most common in the Ottoman Empire, as there were Ottoman, Arabic and Persian languages, which were used in the spheres of public administration, religion and culture. In this regard, it is not surprising that the Circassian Society of Unity and Mutual Assistance printed its charter and declarations on the basis of this writing. The alphabet of Javid Pasha, who served as the director of this institution, was used in the school opened by the society [23].

However, during the existence of the Society in Turkey, there were serious socio-political changes associated with the Young Turk revolution and its consequences. There was no consensus among Circassians about which alphabet should be used for the written Circassian language – Arabic or Latin. In 1908, the organization introduced the Latin alphabet for the Abkhaz and Adyghe languages along with Arabic.

The issue of choosing the basis for the alphabet was dealt with by the linguistic commission under the leadership of Yusuf Izzet, who published the results of its activities in the newspaper "Gazette". In 1910, the commission held a competition for the best Circassian alphabet [33, s. 5]. Subsequently, other alphabet projects were presented in the newspaper. There were also opinions expressed regarding the advantages and disadvantages of using specific alphabets. Thus, supporters of the Latin alphabet believed that this alphabet was not only convenient for studying and printing, but would also contribute to the assimilation of European languages and familiarization with the "achievements of the progress of Western nations" (see Milel-and garbiyenin terriakiyats) [33, s. 5]. Circassians, who advocated Arabic, in turn, they linked their position with arguments in favor of religion and noted the absence of cases of the transition of "Muslim nations" to the Latin alphabet [26, s. 4]. In their opinion, Circassians are an eastern nation, and communication with Turks, Tatars and Arabs is important for them. They stated that it was the development of the national language (osm. lisan-and milliye), and not the Latin alphabet, that would contribute to progress [33, s. 5]. European languages, in turn, are needed only by small groups of intellectuals.

As a result of these discussions, the commission of Yusuf Izzet informally left both alphabets in order to come to a consensus on the best option in the future [26, 33]. In 1912, another Latin-based alphabet appeared, proposed by Ali Pychy Haluk Bey [34].

It should be added that the Circassians of the Ottoman Empire were also familiar with the Cyrillic alphabet variants – the Adyghe alphabet, compiled in 1861 by Umar Bersei, and the Kabardian alphabet, developed jointly by Bersei and the Russian military, ethnographer and linguist P. Uslar [10, 35]. Despite these variants of writing, in Russia the most famous work of U. Bersei remains the "Primer of the Circassian language", containing the writing of the Circassian language on an Arabic graphic basis [14].

Thus, the purpose of attempts to create alphabets in Russia and Turkey, which in both states were carried out by intellectuals associated with the military and ruling circles, was to construct a written language-the basis for the dissemination of literacy and printing. This process was an integral part of nation-building, since the emerging variants of the written language reflected the variants of national projects. On the territory of the Russian Empire, the Circassian language was most often represented as a single language for all the Adygs, as evidenced by philological works describing its dialects ("dialects") – Kabardian, which sometimes stood out as a separate language, and others. This process ended after the arrival of Soviet power with the appearance of fundamental linguistic descriptions of the Adyghe and Kabardino-Circassian languages, which became the fundamental elements of several Soviet national projects. In the Ottoman Empire, in turn, there was a tendency to unite the Adyghe language (the separation of dialects was noted less often), Adyghe and Abkhaz-Abaza or all North Caucasian languages, which can often be observed in the Circassian diaspora at the present time, as there are dominated by Caucasian, Pan-Adyghe and Abkhaz-Adyghe national projects. One way or another, the historical processes of language construction through the creation of writing have had a significant impact on the perception of the Circassian language – and in this regard, the Circassian nation – in Russia and Turkey, which have developed to date.

As a result of the conducted research, it can be stated that the creation of writing has become an important phase of Circassian nation-building in its various variations. In the conditions of interaction with Russian and Turkish (Ottoman) society, Circassians invariably began to develop their own writing, however, depending on the living conditions and socio-political situation, they chose different alphabets, perceived as a cultural orientation. Moreover, writing was developed by Circassians for different languages: Pan-Adyghe or Kabardian in Russia, Pan-Adyghe, Adygo-Abkhazo-Abaza, Pan-Caucasian, Ubykh in Turkey, compiling different lists of dialects in accordance with this. These first attempts to create a written language, which in Russia also had a largely external character, laid the foundation for the subsequent variable development of Circassian nationalism, which is reflected in the level of proficiency in the native languages of Circassians in the Caucasus and in the diaspora and communication between Russian and Turkish Circassians.

References
1. Saussure, F. de. (1995). Cours de linguistique générale. Paris: Payot et Rivages.
2. Billig, M. (1995). Nations and Languages. In Banal Nationalism (pp. 13-36). London: Sage Publications.
3. Aydemir, İ. (1988). Göç. Kuzey Kafkasya’lıların Göç Tarihi. Ankara: Gelişim Matbaası.
4. Popko, I. D. (1858). Chernomorskie kazaki v ikh grazhdanskom i voennom bytu. Ocherki kraya, obshchestva, vooruzhennoi sily i sluzhby. SPb.
5. Potto, V. (1888). Kavkazskaya voina v otdel'nykh ocherkakh, epizodakh, legendakh i biografiyakh. T. 2. Ermolovskoe vremya. Vyp. 3. Izd. 2. SPb.
6. Khan-Girei. (1978). Zapiski o Cherkesii. Nal'chik: El'brus.
7. Nogma, Sh. B. (1956). Filologicheskie trudy, 1. Nal'chik.
8. Berzhe, A. P. (1891). Kratkii biograficheskii ocherk Shora Bekmurzin Nogmova In Nogmov, Sh. B. (1891). Istoriya adykheiskogo naroda, sostavlennaya po predaniyam kabardintsev Shora-Bekmurzin-Nogmovym, dopolnennaya predisloviem i ispravlennaya synom ego Erust.-Shora-Bekmurzin-Nogmovym. 3-e izd., dop. Pyatigorsk: Tip. I. P. Afanas'eva.
9. Petin, S. (1911). Sobstvennyi ego imperatorskogo velichestva konvoi. 1811–1911 gg., izd. 2. SPb. Cit. ex Khan-Girei. (1978). Zapiski o Cherkesii. Nal'chik: El'brus.
10. Gazzaeva, Z. A., Tsallagova T. Kh. (2017). Vidnyi pedagog i prosvetitel' narodov Severnogo Kavkaza vtoroi poloviny XIX veka U. Bersei. Akademicheskaya publitsistika, 9, 65-68.
11. Kazakov, A. V. (2006). Adygi (cherkesy) na rossiiskoi voennoi sluzhbe. Voevody i ofitsery. Seredina XVI – nachalo XX v. Biograficheskii spravochnik. Nal'chik.
12. Sovetskaya istoricheskaya entsiklopediya. (1962). V 16 tomakh. Tom 2. BAAL — VASHINGTON. M.: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya.
13. Lyul'e, L. Ya. (1846). Slovar' russko-cherkesskii, ili adigskii, s kratkoi grammatikoi sego poslednego yazyka, odobrennyi S.-Peterburgskoi akademiei nauk. Odessa.
14. Bersei, U. (1853). Bukvar' cherkesskogo yazyka. Tiflis.
15. Lopatinskii, L. G. (1890). Russko-kabardinskii slovar' s ukazatelem i kratkoi grammatikoi. Tiflis.
16. Atazhukin, K. (1865). Kabardinskaya azbuka. Tiflis.
17. Nogmov, Sh. B. (1891). Istoriya adykheiskogo naroda, sostavlennaya po predaniyam kabardintsev Shora-Bekmurzin-Nogmovym, dopolnennaya predisloviem i ispravlennaya synom ego Erust.-Shora-Bekmurzin-Nogmovym. 3-e izd., dop. Pyatigorsk: Tip. I. P. Afanas'eva.
18. Uslar, P. K. (1887). Etnografiya Kavkaza. Yazykoznanie. Abkhazskii yazyk. Tiflis.
19. Huvaj, F. (2000). Adıge Alfabeleri. Ankara: Adıge Yayınları.
20. Özbek (Yediç), B. (1991). Çerkes Tarihi Kronolojisi. Ankara: Kafdağı Yayınları.
21. Güçtekin, N. (2013/1). Çerkes Teavün Mektebi (1910-1914). Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları, 12(23), 1-21.
22. Chochiev, G. V. (2011). Obshchestvo edineniya cherkesov i ego pechatnyi organ – gazeta «Ittikhad». Vestnik SPbGU, 13(3), 52-62.
23. Arslan (Aksoy), E. Z. (2008). Circassian Organizations in the Ottoman Empire (1908–1923). Master Thesis. Boğaziçi University.
24. Guaze. (1911, 8 Haziran). 10.
25. Hamed-Troyansky, V. Imperial Refuge: Resettlement of Muslims from Russia in the Ottoman Empire, 1860-1914. PhD Dissertation. Stanford University, 2018. 563 p.
26. Guaze. (1911, 2 Nisan Efrenci). 1.
27. Guaze. (1911 17 Nisan). 3.
28. Psikhomakhova, A. R. (2011). Kul'turno-prosvetitel'skaya deyatel'nost' intelligentsii na Severnom Kavkaze (konets XIX – nachalo XX vv.). Sovremennye problemy servisa i turizma, 1, 23-30.
29. Isaev, M. I. (1979). Yazykovoe stroitel'stvo v SSSR (Protsessy sozdaniya pis'mennostei narodov SSSR). M.: Nauka.
30. Kumakhova, Z. Yu. (1972). Razvitie adygskikh literaturnykh yazykov. M.: Nauka.
31. Nechaev, S. D. (1826). Otryvki iz Putevykh zapisok o Yugo-Vostochnoi Rossii. Moskovskii telegraf, 7(1), 26-41.
32. Istoriya narodov Severnogo Kavkaza (konets XVIII v. – 1917 g.). (1988). M.: Nauka.
33. Guaze. (1911, 22 Haziran). 12.
34. Guaze. (1912, 31 Teşrin-i Evvel). 44.
35. Shturba, V. A. (2010) Obrazovanie kak element okul'turivaniya gorskikh narodov Kavkaza na zavershayushchem etape Kavkazskoi voiny. Istoricheskaya i sotsial'no-obrazovatel'naya mysl', 3(5), 5-14.

Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

When, in the second half of the XVI century, the mono-national Moscow state began a gradual transformation into a multinational Russian state, hardly anyone could have expected that after a few hundred years Russia would become a Eurasian state in which ethnic groups differing in language, culture, economic structure, and religious affiliation would live in boundless spaces. Special mention should be made here of the Soviet era, when within the framework of nation-building not only the borders between the union republics were formed, but also writing for individual ethnic groups was often created. However, the processes of writing creation are also noted in the pre-revolutionary era. These circumstances determine the relevance of the article submitted for review, the subject of which is the creation of Circassian writing in Russia and Turkey. The author aims to show the role of language in nation-building, analyze the position of the Circassian language in the XIX - early XX centuries, and also consider the variants of Circassian writing created in Russia and the Ottoman Empire during this period. The work is based on the principles of analysis and synthesis, reliability, objectivity, the methodological basis of the research is a systematic approach, which is based on the consideration of the object as an integral complex of interrelated elements. In his work, the author also relies on the theory of M. Billig, "according to which the modern concepts of "language" and "dialect" arose in the same era as the concepts of nations and national states." The scientific novelty of the article lies in the very formulation of the topic: the author seeks to characterize the creation of the Circassian language as a factor of nation-building in the historical homeland (North Caucasus) and in the Diaspora (Turkey). Considering the bibliographic list of the article, its scale and versatility should be noted as a positive point: in total, the list of references includes over 30 different sources and studies. The undoubted advantage of the reviewed article is the involvement of foreign literature, including in English, French and Turkish, which is determined by the very formulation of the topic. From the sources attracted by the author, we will point to periodical materials, dictionaries and encyclopedic materials, etc. Among the studies used, we note the works of M.I. Isaev, A.R. Psychomakhova, V.A. Sturba, which focus on various aspects of cultural and educational activities in the North Caucasus. Note that the bibliography is important both from a scientific and educational point of view: after reading the text of the reviewed article, readers can turn to other materials on its topic. In general, in our opinion, the integrated use of various sources and research contributed to the solution of the tasks facing the author. The style of writing the article can be attributed to a scientific one, at the same time accessible to understanding not only to specialists, but also to a wide readership, to everyone who is interested in both nation-building in general and Circassians in particular. The appeal to the opponents is presented at the level of the collected information received by the author during the work on the topic of the article. The structure of the work is characterized by a certain logic and consistency, it can be distinguished by an introduction, the main part, and conclusion. At the beginning, the author determines the relevance of the topic, shows that for a long time Circassians "used mainly Arabic for written communication, although there are isolated examples of writing letters in local dialects using Arabic letters." The author draws attention to the fact that later "in the process of creating Circassian writing, researchers and public figures used different bases — Arabic, Cyrillic and Latin." Of course, while in Russia researchers relied on Cyrillic, in Turkey it was Arabic and Latin. The paper shows that "the purpose of attempts to create alphabets in Russia and Turkey, which in both countries were carried out by intellectuals associated with the military and ruling circles, was to construct a written language-the basis for the dissemination of literacy and printing." The main conclusion of the article is that "the first attempts to create a written language, which in Russia also had a largely external character, laid the foundation for the subsequent variable development of Circassian nationalism, which is reflected in the level of proficiency in the native languages of Circassians in the Caucasus and in the diaspora and communication between Russian and Turkish Circassians." The article submitted for review is devoted to an urgent topic, will arouse readers' interest, and its materials can be used both in lecture courses on the history of Russia and in various special courses. In general, in our opinion, the article can be recommended for publication in the journal "Man and Culture".
Link to this article

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.


Other our sites:
Official Website of NOTA BENE / Aurora Group s.r.o.