The significantly increased production of Circassian content on the Internet could be labelled as a form of virtual re-territorialisation of Circassia – especially considering the strong focus on identity and history. I apply the label ‘iCircassia’ as an addition to the classical understanding of the Circassian World as consisting of Circassians of the homeland and the diaspora. I suggest to apply the term ‘digital capitalism’ as an update of the terms ‘print capitalism’ and ‘electronic capitalism’ used by Benedict Anderson and Arjun Appadurai, respectively, to assign earlier periods of mediated mobilisation among nationalities – with or without a nation-state. In the case of the Circassians this is not just exemplified by the many different Circassian websites but also by the Circassian’ use of social media such as YouTube, Facebook and Twitter (Web 2. 0) – transnational and (partly) interactive by definition. A concrete empowerment of Circassian actors through the Internet is taking place. This illustrated how the development of ‘digital capitalism’ has both quantitatively and qualitatively new implications for a dispersed people such as the Circassians compared to earlier periods.

In the context of an institutionalized multi-nationalist ideology, the language policy in Russia is based on the distinction of the native language of Russian people and the languages of all other non-Russians. Such a distinction is reflected in ‘The Constitution of the Russian Federation,’ federal and regional laws and policy practices that have given advantage to Russian over the other titular languages of the indigenous people in the Russian Federation. This article charts the grand "shift" in Russian state policy toward ethnic diversity. The Soviet-era multinational Leninist/Stalinist approach summarized in the slogan "druzhba narodov" (friendship of peoples) shifted toward a more assimilationist nation-building model. Such ideology reduced the ethnic diversity into just a cultural, folkloric feature of an otherwise monolingual, mono-cultural nation-state. What is the purpose of discriminatory ethnic and language policy? Our case study of Circassians, one of the ethnic groups in the North Caucasus, demonstrates that, after many decades, such a policy only caused political and cultural damages to all sides and alienation between them. On the one hand, the assimilationist language policy continues to cause problems with the non-Russian ethnic groups adding to the major challenges that the Russian state faces today. On the other hand, non-Russian ethnic groups, though not yet assimilated by Russian culture, have undergone significant decrease in terms of their rights to develop their languages.

Makalede, Abhazlarin Osmanli Imparatorlugu’na 1867 göçünün hazirlik ve gerçeklesme süreçleriyle sonuçlarinin bazi yönlerine isik tutan Rus, Osmanli ve Ingiliz arsiv belgeleri takdim edilmektedir. Bu tanikliklarin önemi, özellikle iki ilgili devletin bu konudaki yaklasim ve kararlarini üretmelerinin bazi iç mekanizmalari hakkinda bilgimizi tasrih etmelerinden kaynaklanmaktadir. Sözkonusu sürgünü gerçeklestiren Rusya yönetiminin esas hedefi Abhazya’nin etno-demografik ve sosyal yapisini köklü bir sekilde “düzeltmek” ve bu sekilde kendi egemenligini pekistirmek iken, büyük ölçüde emrivakiye getirilen Osmanli makamlari, öncelikle yeni uyruklarinin kabulü ve iskaniyla ilgili maddi masraflarinin asgariye indirilmesinin pesinde gözükmektedirler. Bununla birlikte, her iki hükümet de kendi topraklarinda göçmenler arasinda büyük çapli insani kayiplara meydan vermeme konusunda görece üst derecede kaygi göstermistir. Rus ve Osmanli verilerini genel olarak dogrulayan Ingiliz konsolos raporlarinda ise Abhaz feodal çevrelerinin bazi önde gelen temsilcilerinin göç sorunuyla ilgili tutumlari hakkinda dikkate deger bilgiler sunulmaktadir. The paper presents some Russian, Ottoman and British archival materials, which shed light on several aspects of the process of preparation, implementation and consequences of the mass migration of Abkhazians to the Ottoman Empire in 1867. The importance of the accounts of the events of 1867 as presented in these documents is due mainly to the fact that they clarify our understanding of the workings of decision- and policy-making mechanisms of the two states involved. While the main objective for the Tsarist administration, who initiated this deportation, was the radical ‘correction’ of the ethno-demographic and social structure of Abkhazia with the view of strengthening its position there, for the Ottoman authorities, who to a large extent faced with a fait accompli, the primary aim was to minimize the financial burden of the reception and resettlement of their new subjects. At the same time, both governments seemed relatively and genuinely concerned to prevent large-scale human losses among the immigrants in their territories. The British consular reports generally support the Russian and Ottoman data and provide noteworthy additional information on the attitude of some prominent members of the Abkhaz feudal circles on the immigration issue.

?????????????? ?????????, ??? ????????, ????????? ? ???????, ??????????? ? ????????? ?????????????? ???????. ? ?? ?? ????? ?????, ??? ???????? ??????? ??????? ??????????? ??????????????, ??????????? ????????????? ?????????? ??????????? ? ????????? ??????. ?????? ????????? ????????? – ???????????????, ?????????????? – ???????????? ? ??????????? ???? ?????????? ???????? ???????????? ????????? ???????? ?????? ???????. ??? ??????????? ????? ????????? ????? ???????? ????????? ????????, ??????????? ????? ???????????????? ??????????, ? ?.?. ? ?? ?????????? ?????????? - ???????. ??????? ????? ???????????? ????? ? ??????????? ?????????? ????????? ????????? ???????? ?????????? ???????? ???????? ?????? ?????? ?????????? ????????? – ???????? ? ?????????????? ????????? (???????, ?????), ?????????-?????????????? ??????????? ? ????. ????? ?? ??????????? ??????? ?????????? ????????????? ???????? ???????????, ????? ?????????, ???????????? ??????????? ?????????????? ?????????? ? ????????? ?????????? ???????? ??????. ??????, ???????? ? ????????? ?????????? ???????? ????-???? (???????), ????????????? ? ??????????? ? «??????????????» ?????????, ???????????? ????? ??????? ??????? ??????????? ???????????????. ? ?????? ?????????? ???????? ?? ???????????????? ???????? ???????? ? ????????????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?????????, ?????? ?????? ????????????? ? ?????????-?????????????? ??????? ?????? ?????????????? ?????????. As is known, texts of mythological narratives are closely linked to ethno-cultural memories. At the same time, the archaic, pre-Christian and pre-Islamic thoughts tend gradually to be pushed into the passive memory under the pressure of monotheistic religions. Epic mythological texts – the cosmogonic and ethnogenic ones – constitute a rather small corpus of oral texts within the folklore of the Circassian diaspora. This can be explained by the overall disappearance of Nart Epic tradition itself and the decrease in the number of professional narrators, not only in the diaspora but also in the ethnic homeland - the Caucasus. Oral texts of actual mythology - stories of mythological creatures (demons and ghosts), ritual-mythological instructions and taboos take up a considerable place in the folk territory of different local traditions of Circassian diaspora. This article investigates the problems of maintenance, forms of existence and meta-language peculiarities of mythological narratives in the folklore of the Circassian diaspora in Turkey through the observations the present author has made in her field trips to Turkey. The texts that have survived in the local cultural traditions of Uzunyayla, a plateau which is located between the Central Anatolian towns of Kayseri, Sivas and Maras and is home to a relatively high number of Circassian, are analyzed within the framework of "common Circassian traditions” as defined by Caucasian researchers. Attention also has been paid to the principles of methodological description and the cartography of characters of actual mythology, and the symbolic and socio-pragmatic functions of oral mythological stories are analyzed.

The significantly increased production of Circassian content on the Internet could be labelled as a form of virtual re-territorialisation of Circassia – especially considering the strong focus on identity and history. I apply the label ‘iCircassia’ as an addition to the classical understanding of the Circassian World as consisting of Circassians of the homeland and the diaspora. I suggest to apply the term ‘digital capitalism’ as an update of the terms ‘print capitalism’ and ‘electronic capitalism’ used by Benedict Anderson and Arjun Appadurai, respectively, to assign earlier periods of mediated mobilisation among nationalities – with or without a nation-state. In the case of the Circassians this is not just exemplified by the many different Circassian websites but also by the Circassian’ use of social media such as YouTube, Facebook and Twitter (Web 2. 0) – transnational and (partly) interactive by definition. A concrete empowerment of Circassian actors through the Internet is taking place. This illustrated how the development of ‘digital capitalism’ has both quantitatively and qualitatively new implications for a dispersed people such as the Circassians compared to earlier periods.

Bu makalede Osmanli Devlet Arsivi belgelerine göre, XVIII. Yüzyilin sonlarinda Kuzey ve Bati Kafkasya’da uygulanan Osmanli politikalarinin bazi yönleri incelenmektedir. Olaylarin ilgili dönemde Osmanli belgelerine özgü yorumlanisi ortaya konmaktadir. In this article, some aspects of the Ottoman policies on the Northern and Western Caucasus in the late 18th Century- as reflected in the documents of the Ottoman state archives, have been analysed. How the Ottomans evaluated the events of the era is highlighted.

Rus-Kafkas Savasi’nin sonuna yaklasildigi 1860’lardan itibaren Çarlik Rusyasi tarafindan Osmanli topraklarina sürülen Çerkeslerin önemli bir kismi Balkanlar’a, bunlarin içinde bir kismi da bugünkü Bulgaristan topraklarina yerlestirildi. Ivraca (Vratsa) ve Rahova (Oryahovo) kazalarinda toplam 19 Çerkes yerlesim yeri bulunuyordu. Eldeki nüfus verilere göre göçmen Çerkes ailelerinde ortalama nüfus 3.3 kisiyken, 8 kisilik ailelere de rastlaniyordu. Ailelerin çogu 2 çocuga sahipti, 4-5 çocuklu aileler ise istisnaydi. Hem kiz ve erkek çocuk, hem de kadin ve erkek sayilari arasinda nedenleri tespit edilemeyen önemli bir oransizlik görülüyordu. Ovalik Rahova kazasindan farkli olarak Ivraca kazasi daglik ve topraklari taslikliydi, tarima elverisli degildi. Dolayisiyla Ivraca kazasina daha çok hayvancilikla geçinen Çerkesler yerlestirilirken Rahova’dakilerin önemli kismi günlük islerde çalisiyordu. Çerkesler, tarim arazilerinin büyüklügü açisindan önemli sorunlar yasamadilar. Elde ettikleri ürünün miktarini dogal afetler, topragin kalitesi, mevcut is gücü, istek ve ihtiyaç gibi faktörler belirliyordu. Muhtemelen Rahova kazasindaki Çerkes ailelerinin çogu, 4 kisilik bir ailenin yillik gida ihtiyacini karsilayabiliyordu. Bazilari ürünlerini bir kismini yerel pazarda satabiliyordu. Bu nedenle Çerkes aileleri, tüm köylüler gibi hasat ettikleri ürüne bagimliydilar. 1877-1878 Osmanli - Rus Savasi’nin sonuna kadar bölgede yasamaya devam eden Çerkesler, savas sirasinda Bulgaristan’daki yerlerini terk etmek zorunda kaldilar ve imparatorlugun Anadolu ve Ortadogu’daki topraklarina yerlestiler. Böylece Bulgaristan’daki Çerkes varligi sona ermis oldu.