The reviewed monograph concerns the really fundamental problem in relations of Russia with the North Caucasus peoples in the 16th – mid 19th centuries that of divergence of the conditions, forms and “the pace” of abridging the socio-cultural distance between them and of their nearing to the political unity. The authors note that the problem under investigation is highly ideologized and politicized in public in academic discourse as well as objectively caused difficulties of reaching its overall interpretation. Their approach to the problem is built on elaborating the more differentiated conceptual framework, which would internally be enough complex and flexible to embrace all the complexity and contradictory nature of historical and political process and externally be rigid enough to protect the scientific historical discourse from foreign to science socio-cultural and political influences. As a whole the authorial team succeeded in resolving the task they had put before themselves. In the first part of the book they reconstruct the evolution of relations between Russian state and the peoples of the North Caucasus during 16th – 18th centuries from asymmetric partnership to the Russian domination in the macro-region. In the second part of the book the period of 1801-1860s is considered. Military-political aspects of the process of incorporation of the region into the Russian empire and re-formatting of its ethno-demographic and ethno-social composition as a result of Russian colonization are examined. There follows further thoroughly elaborated research of the history of administrative reforms and of establishment of Russian judicial institutions. The chapter on cultural and ideological changes in the highlander’s societies and the ways of imperial power’s legitimation concludes the work. The general conception of the work successfully balances historical and logical as well retrospective and prospective dimensions in the vision of Russia’s political interactions with the North Caucasus. But nonetheless one can see the elements of inconsistency or one-sidedness in the analysis of each phase or aspect of investigated process. While the authors were eager to take into consideration all meaningful works in the field they did not escape the visible shortcomings here. Notwithstanding all of these the reviewed work may be characterized as valuable experience in generalizing research of the North Caucasus’ history.