The process of state formation in Transcaucasia and Dagestan in the first thousand – the beginning of the second thousand a.d. (comparative study)

Background. The theory of statehood formation needs to be clarified by clarifying the specifics of the trajectories of state development in various regions of the world. This will allow us to take a more unbiased look at the process of state formation, using the latest scientific data, clearing it of myths and nationalistic layers. The purpose of the study is to use the example of Transcaucasia and Dagestan, which form a single historical and geopolitical whole, to analyze the “buffer state” of this space, which made it possible to preserve, if not independence, then at least state autonomy among stronger neighbors. Materials and methods. The article is based on scientific developments of domestic and foreign experts. To a certain extent, she is looking for an alternative and complement to the traditional Marxist doctrine of socio-economic formations, paying tribute to geopolitical analysis and the comparative method. Results. The article notes that due to the will of geo-political circumstances and due to the predominance of the mountainous landscape in Transcaucasia and Dagestan, it was difficult to form stable large states. Of course, they arose from time to time (for example, Urartu), but they did not leave the influence that was associated with the Persian Achaemenid Empire or Sassanid Iran, Byzantium and the Arab Caliphate. Large states (Great Armenia, Caucasian Albania, Colchis, Iberia, the Georgian Kingdom under David the Builder and Tamar) spontaneously arose and disappeared, but more often this region was in a state of subordination to powerful neighbors or autonomy. Conclusions. The position of the “buffer zoneˮ put forward by some researchers (for example, P.A. Baranenko and V.V. Khapaev) in relation to the 9th–12th centuries does not seem to us to be fully developed. Based on the idea of Professor A.Y. Salomatin, we should use such a concept as the trajectory of state development, which should be supplemented by another concept – “buffer zone” in a broad sense. In the context of the geopolitical mountainous situation of the region, buffering did not entail complete subordination to one of the powerful neighbors, as was the case in the southern Russian steppes, where Russia and Po-land were competing neighbors. On the contrary, there were more opportunities for autonomy in the Transcaucasia and Dagestan regions.