| |
This essay is a summary and extension of remarks made at a conference on
Circassia
sponsored by the Jamestown Foundation Washington DC,
21 May 2007
CIRCASSIANS
IN HISTORY
by Paul B. Henze
Circassians share with the
Georgians the distinction of being the oldest continually identifiable
ethnic group in the Caucasus. As far back as it is possible to project
their history, they seem to have populated the northeastern shore of the
Black Sea and the hinterlands extending to the high mountains behind. Their
original territory certainly extended to the Straits of Kerch and possibly
into Crimea. Men who spoke languages ancestral to the complex Circassian
dialects of modern times probably met the Greek colonists who in the last
millennium BC established trading posts along the Black Sea shore, but the
Greeks did not penetrate far into the interior.[1]
Greek colonies linked Circassians to the Mediterranean world but the
Circassians' ancestors were also in contact with a wide range of peoples who
moved through the Caucasian foothills and the steppes to the north over the
millennia. The great variety of physical types among Circassians is
evidence of admixture from many ethnic strains. Nevertheless, the fertile
valleys and forested uplands of their homeland provided for such a secure
mode of life that Circassian groups seem to have experienced little
temptation to migrate elsewhere. Livestock herding and agriculture provided
a dependable livelihood. Population increased steadily, leading adventurous
young men to seek employment as soldiers far from home.[2]
Thus a pattern which has continued to modern times was established.
Circassians were deeply attached to their homeland, but at the same time
aware of the world beyond and unafraid to embark on foreign adventure.
Englishmen and other Europeans who spent time among Circassians in the
early 19th century found reason to compare their society to ancient Greece.
This was more than a mere reflection of classical education. There are
distinct parallels between Circassians and ancient Greeks. Both were
conscious of belonging to a common nationality, with close linguistic ties
and common social structures, sharing customs, traditions of origin and
ancestry, but they did not develop unified political institutions or
hereditary ruling structures. Instead they remained divided into separate
tribes and clans confined to their own regions, based on ancient, semi-mythological
kinship traditions. There were rivalries between them, sometimes blood
feuds and raids and from time to time extended hostilities. Like the
ancient Greeks Circassians shared an enormous body of oral tradition--literature
passed from one generation to the next. While the Greek gods and goddesses
became part of the Western intellectual tradition and still form part of the
imagery of European languages and Western civilization in general--Venus,
Mars, Mercury, Apollo, etc.--Circassian gods and heroes are mostly unknown,
but as John Colarusso has demonstrated, their lore is as rich as that of the
Greeks.[3]
There are also important differences between Greek and Circassian
development. Circassians did not evolve a literate culture. Their language
remained unwritten. Consequently they produced no written literary or
historical records, as the Greeks did. Likewise they did not develop arts
such as architecture, painting and sculpture. For knowledge of Circassian
history up to the 16th century we must rely on scraps of information
provided by Greek, Roman, Byzantine, and Arab writers and, until the end of
the 18th century, Russian sources. Systematic examination of these and
additional sources which may come to light may, of course reveal new
information.
Circassian tribes living along the Black Sea engaged in trade with
Venetians and Genoese, who continued earlier Greek traditions of commerce in
the Black Sea and established trading posts on the Circassian/Abkhaz coast.
The Circassian lands were for the most part not directly affected by Islam
until the 18th century. As late as the early 19th century many traces of
early Christian influence, which apparently came both from Byzantium and
Georgia from the 6th or 7th century onward, could be found.[4] There
is almost no evidence of links to Russian Orthodoxy, but Russians were
assiduous in investigating evidence of early Christian influence when they
penetrated Circassia in the 19th century. They restored churches at Gagra
and Pitsunda and in Soviet times maintained that these were evidence of
ancient Russian links to the area.
Meanwhile young Circassian men had continued to depart to find
employment in armies to the south.[5]
Along with Georgians and other Caucasians they found employment as
mercenaries with Muslim armies opposing the Crusaders, including those of
Saladin and the Seljuk Sultans. Circassians and Turks formed a major
portion of the Mamluk regiment which rebelled and replaced the ruling
dynasty of Egypt in 1250. The Mamluks ruled Egypt for the next 300 years
until the Ottoman conquest in 1517. Mamluk rule was one of the most
brilliant periods of Egyptian Islamic history:
| |
Late Mamluk culture was rich in Persian and Ottoman
influences. The cosmopolitan heritage of Mamluke Egypt was...
reinforced by the migration of Iranian, Turkish, Spanish and
Mesopotamian craftsmen and scholars, who brought with them metalwork,
textile, ceramic and building crafts, which were adopted by the Mamluks
to adorn the life of the court and the military aristocracy. The
religious and cosmopolitan aspects of Mamluke court culture were
tempered by a parochial and military emphasis. The Mamluk court
listened to Turkish and Circassian poetry. The Mamluks also
reveled in military reviews, tournaments and displays of martial arts.[6] |
Thus while individual Circassians were both aware of the outer world
and some were involved in it, those who remained in their valleys and hills
northeast of the Black Sea led isolated rural lives. They were rarely
affected by famine or outbreaks of disease. Population increased gradually
but produced little social or political pressure, for emigration provided an
outlet. Clan and tribal groups pursued rivalries with each other and
interrelated in various ways with neighboring Cossacks. Patterns of
government and administration differed. Inland in Kabarda princely families
dominated life. It was in this region that contact with the expanding
Russian Empire first occurred. The first Russians to make contact with the
Circassians were Cossacks, men who fled from the north for a variety of
reasons, mostly for a freer style of life. They became unconscious agents
of Russian expansion. They often established friendly relations with local
inhabitants, sometimes intermarrying and adopting local styles of life. In
the 16th century Russians representing imperial authority reached agreement
with Kabardian princes who welcomed traders and military support against
rivals. The marriage of Maria Temryukovna to Tsar Ivan the Terrible and her
conversion to Orthodoxy symbolize the cooperative relations that existed at
that time. Russian expansion always entailed some degree of missionary
purpose--encouragement of the spread of Russian Orthodoxy, but religion was
a secondary factor in Russian expansion into the North Caucasus. Kabarda,
where the population was divided into clearly defined social classes, marked
the beginning of a Russian technique of gaining predominance by co-opting
the local aristocracy--the Kabardan princes, whose descendants became
prominent among the Russian nobility. This approach was less effective with
ethnic groups that had a more egalitarian social structure, such as the
Chechens and the Ingush, many of the other Circassian tribes, and the
peoples of Dagestan.
Islam had entered the Caucasus early, with Arab incursions into
Dagestan in the 7th and 8th centuries, but its spread westward was slow.
Most of the mountaineers of the eastern and central Caucasus adhered to
traditional beliefs until the early 18th century. Islam penetrated
gradually in the form of Sufi (mainly Nakhshbendi) brotherhoods which took
root in Chechnya, while in Azerbaijan under Persian rule Shi'ism became
predominant while Dagestan remained primarily Sunni. The Russian advance
southward into the central mountain regions met with strong resistance by
most of the mountaineers. Ushurma, a Chechen from the village of Aldy (not
far from present-day Grozny) was born in 1832. As a young man he developed
a strong interest in religion. He went to Dagestan for education and
returned to become an imam deeply concerned about the Russian advance.
Russia established the fortress of Grozny in 1818--deliberately choosing the
name ("Awesome") to intimidate the Mountaineers.[7]
As the Russian advance continued, Ushurma changed his name to Sheikh Mansur
("Victor") and declared holy war against the invaders. It soon inflamed the
entire Caucasus. His greatest success was in Chechnya and Dagestan, but his
activity extended to the Circassian lands as well where he was active in the
early 19th century. He happened to be in Anapa on the Circassian coast when
it was captured by Tsarist forces in 1791. He was treated as an outlaw,
taken to St. Petersburg and imprisoned in Schlusselburg where he died in
1794.[8]
His mission was not finished; it lived after him. The holy war he had
sparked continued unabated in Chechnya and Dagestan, where it came to be led
by the great Shamil. In Circassia too the memory of "Elijah Mansur" served
to inspire resistance to Russia in the 1830s and 1840s. A Tatar bard was
reported singing of him
He was born to tred the Moscoff's pride
Down to the lowly dust;
He fought, he conquered, near and wide,
The northern race accursed.[9]
Sheikh Mansur's campaigns made Islam a symbol of resistance to Russia
throughout the Caucasus, thus contributing to its firmer establishment among
the Circassians. The Ottomans favored the consolidation of Sunni Islam in
the territories over which they exercised suzerainty. Istanbul never
established a regular administrative structure in the Caucasus as it did in
the Balkans. Turks preferred to exercise authority through local chiefs and
regarded adherence to Islam as a measure of their loyalty. Trade and other
forms of contact with Turkish ports expanded in the early 19th century.
Circassians were well received when they came to Trabzon or Istanbul; some
emigrated. Many Circassian beauties entered Ottoman harems, including those
of the Sultans. Russia pressed steadily against Circassian territories
along the Black Sea and built forts at strategic locations on the coast. As
throughout the rest of the Caucasus, Tsarist policy was based on "divide and
rule" approaches, setting one ethnic group against another. In the case of
the Circassians, Russians aimed to capitalize on clan and tribal rivalries,
offering trade advantages in return for cooperation and withholding them
from groups opposing Russian advance.
I will not repeat an account here of the long struggle of Shamil which
lasted until 1859 or of the parallel struggle of the Circassians from the
1830s through the 1860s, for I have already described Shamil's campaigns in
earlier articles[10]
and they have been more extensively recounted in a variety of books, notably
the recent one by the Israeli scholar, Moshe Gammer.[11]
Shamil was overwhelmed and surrendered in 1859. Circassian resistance
continued for five more years. It took strenuous Russian efforts to defeat
them. An aspect of the final phase of the Circassian resistance against
Russia which I did not cover was the involvement of Poles who were resisting
Russian domination of their country and regarded the Circassians as their
allies. Their involvement is well described by Peter Brock, "The Fall of
Circassia: a Study in Private Diplomacy" in The English Historical Review,
July 1956, pp. 401-427. It is available on the Circassian World Website.[12]
Poles, who fought Russian domination in repeated rebellions, played an
important role in many aspects of Caucasian resistance to Russia but in the
end were unable to prevent Caucasian--and Circassian--defeat, or their own,
until 1918.
Tragedy overwhelmed the Circassians, as it had the inhabitants of the
central and eastern Caucasus. The fate of the Circassians comes much closer
to constituting mass genocide because their lands had long been coveted by
the Russians for settlement. The regions inhabited by Chechens, Ingush and
the peoples of Dagestan were less appealing for settlers from Russia and
Ukraine, though these peoples were also eventually subjected to colonization
by Slavs. Consequently, though hundreds of thousands of people from these
regions also fled to the Ottoman Empire, Russia pursued a straightforward
policy of ethnic cleansing in Circassia. During the years 1985-1890 well
over a million Circassians were forced to depart, often under extremely
onerous circumstances. Others were forced to move to less desirable lands
than those they originally occupied. Perhaps 150,000 Circassians remained
in their original territories. At least half a million are estimated to
have reached the Ottoman Empire, but that many more perished of starvation
and disease. Modern Americans and Europeans have difficulty understanding
how different conditions were then from what they are today. There were no
international organizations that concerned themselves with refugees. There
were no international sources of assistance for countries receiving them.
Ottoman authorities welcomed the Circassians but their resources were
extremely limited. The most they could do was to send them to parts of
Anatolia and Arab areas to the south where there was room for them to settle.
There was little knowledge of these events in the outer world. There was
almost no journalistic reporting of the plight of the Circassians and other
Caucasians. British consular officers in Trabzon continued a tradition of
following Caucasian developments. Their reports are a primary source of
information on the fate of these people,[13]
but in recent years more material from Ottoman archives and, since the
collapse of the Soviet Union, recollections and documents from Caucasians
themselves, have shed further light on these tragic happenings.
The excellent presentations of Prof. Kemal Karpat during the
conference provide a great deal of insight into the fate of Circassians in
the Ottoman Empire. His and other researches are continuing. Since the
collapse of Soviet communism, Circassians who inhabit the three "autonomous"
territories in the North Caucasus that were established for them in the
early Soviet period have generated a revival. The perhaps 150,000
Circassians who remained in Russia after the expulsions had increased to
572,168 by the time of the 1989 Soviet census. Of these, 69% were Kabardans.
124,941 Adygei and 52,536 Cherkess were counted in this census, not all
living within the boundaries of their designated regions. There has no
doubt been an increase in numbers during the past, almost three, decades
though current estimates are controversial for there has been emigration but
only small numbers of Circassians from outside Russia have been allowed to
return.
I will conclude by attempting to answer two important questions: (1)
Were and are Circassians a nation? and (2) Were they the victims of genocide?
Criteria for judging nationhood have always been controversial and no
one has ever succeeded in establishing absolute standards of judgment.[14]
Obvious factors are a common language, a sense of history, shared traditions,
a territorial base, a prevailing sense of nationality, and an established
state and government. But if we look at a variety of nations whose
existence are not questioned, we find that some of these factors are lacking.
Switzerland has no common language, but it has a strong sense of history,
shared traditions and a strong state. Armenians regard themselves as a
nation, but only a minority of them live in their state; their sense of
history and traditions is nevertheless strong. They are best defined as a
diaspora nation. The same was long true of Jews who eventually succeeded in
creating a strong state and reviving a language that had almost become
extinct. Poles survived partition and fragmentation by maintaining their
language and traditions in the face of oppression and eventually re-established
their state, though its location had shifted westward. Old, established
European nations and many of those of Asia meet most of the criteria I
listed above, so their nationhood is never questioned. But a large
proportion of new, post-colonial states that are members of the United
Nations lack a common language, consist of several ethnic groups, have
little historical basis or agreed traditions, and are nations only in the
sense that they exist as diplomatically recognized states with governments.
Circassians had (and have) a common language, a keen sense of history
and shared traditions. Though they were deeply attached to the territories
they occupied, they did not develop a strong state or a broad governmental
system. They nevertheless regarded themselves as a nation. Russian
pressure against them reinforced their sense of nationality. It grew
stronger as they suffered reverses and, finally, defeat. A major portion of
Circassians moved to the Ottoman Empire, where they maintained their
identity. They have continued to maintain their identity in Ottoman
successor states. As many as 10% of the present population of the Turkish
Republic may have Circassian ancestry, though the language has been almost
completely lost. In post-Ottoman Middle Eastern states Circassians have
maintained their identity and sometimes their language and have come to
occupy special niches in the societies of these states: Egypt, Syria, Jordan,
Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Israel. In the Soviet Union remaining Circassians were
allocated three different territories. These have continued to exist as
republics of the Russian Federation. There is a strong desire among them to
unify. The collapse of the Soviet Union has resulted in restoration of
relations between Circassians still living in their ancestral territories
and their compatriots in the world outside. Thus, the Circassian nation has
survived and continues to exist both within the boundaries of Russia and
abroad, most notably as a component of the Turkish Republic. Are
Circassians a nation? The answer is yes!
Have they been the victims of genocide? Their fate after defeat by
the armies of the Tsarist Empire in 1864 was clearly attempted genocide.
Russian actions against the Circassians and other Caucasians in the four
final decades of the 19th century generated waves of violence among ethnic
groups which continued into the 20th century and spread throughout the
region to the south of the Caucasus. Imperial Russia's divide-and-rule
approach to other peoples, setting them against each other, resulted in
tragic consequences for Armenians, Kurds, Greeks, Syriac and Nestorian
Christians and other religious and ethnic minorities--Christian and Muslim
alike--throughout the region. The policies and actions of the Soviet Union
exacerbated these effects.
Circassians have retained their sense of nationhood and identity in
spite of the vicissitudes they have endured. Now, at the beginning of the
21st century they face an opportunity to restore their nationhood, in part
in their ancestral lands but perhaps more importantly in the wider world
where they are, in effect, a diaspora nation.
[1]
There was no relationship
between Greek, an Indo-European language, and Circassian, a Palaeocaucasian
one. Greeks found Circassian speech puzzling and called it "babble", giving
rise to the term "barbarian".
[2]
In early Greek and
later Hellenistic times some Circassians undoubtedly served as soldiers in
regions to the south. They can occasionally be identified in accounts of
Greek historians. By the time of the Byzantine Empire, Circassians and
other Caucasians as well as men from various Turkish ethnic groups were
serving in Byzantine formations.
[3] ''Nart
Sagas from the Caucasus, Myths and Legends from the Circassians, Abazas,
Abkhaz and Ubykhs'',
Princeton University Press, 2002.
[4]
Note references in my
''Circassian
Resistance to Russia'',
distributed to participants in the conference.
[5]
Circassian women had
already become legendary for their beauty; increasing numbers were sought
for Turkish harems.
[6]
Prof. Ira M. Lapidus,
A History of Islamic Societies, Cambridge University Press, 1988, p.
356.
[7]
It was never changed
during the Soviet period though Vladikavkaz ("Rule the Caucasus") was
changed twice (first to Ordzhonikidze and then to Dzaudzhikau) before being
restored to its original form.
[8]
Anapa was returned to the
Ottomans in the Treaty of Iassy in 1892 and remained in their hands until
1829 when it was finally ceded to Russia.
[9]
Cited by Edmund
Spencer, ''Travels
in Circassia...'',
London, 1839, Vol. II, p. 294.
[10]
Paul B. Henze, "Fire
and Sword in the Caucasus: the 19th Century Resistance of the North
Caucasian Mountaineers", Central Asian Survey, II/1 (1983), pp. 5-44,
and "Islam
in the North Caucasus - The Example of Chechnya" written in 1993/95
but unpublished; now made available to the Jamestown Foundation.
[11] ''Muslim
Resistance to the Tsar, Frank Cass'',
London, 1994.
[12]
Brock overstresses
the importance of British support for the Circassians, especially the role
of the Scot, David Urquhart.
[13]
They have been drawn on
extensively in recent studies of the expulsion, e.g. Kemal Karpat,
''Ottoman
Population, 1830-1914'',
University of Wisconsin Press, 1985; Justin McCarthy,
''Death
and Exile, the Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1922'',
Princeton, NJ, 1995. Good work is also being done among Circassians
remaining in Russia, e.g. the symposium of the Adygei Republican Institute
of Humanitarian Research, Rossiya i Cherkessiya, Izdatel'stvo "Meoty",
Maikop, 1995.
[14]
The late Hugh
Seton-Watson made one of the most notable attempts in his
''Nations
and States'',
Westview Press, Boulder CO, 1977.
Conference - The Circassians: Past, Present
and Future
21 May 2007, Jamestown Foundation, Washington, DC, (Video
Available)
Jamestown Foundation

Articles, Publications & Documents |
Links
| Last
Updates
|
Archive
|
About
Site
|
Home
Page
Please
send your
comments, opinions,
questions and suggestions by e-mail :
info@circassianworld.com
|
|