Abstract
Introduction. Historians have long approached Kazakh–Dzungar relations mainly through warfare and its political consequences. The broadening source base and the appearance of new research perspectives have gradually altered this emphasis, making it necessary to reconsider how the subject has developed in recent historiography. Purpose and objectives. This article examines the principal interpretations found in Kazakhstani and international scholarship and identifies the questions that have attracted the greatest attention. It also considers how changes in sources and methodology have affected historians’ understanding of relations between the two khanates. Materials and methods. The analysis draws on historical studies of Kazakh–Dzungar relations in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The works were grouped according to their main interpretative concerns and compared in their treatment of conflict, diplomacy and regional politics. Historiographical, comparative-historical and problem-chronological methods were used to trace both continuities and differences among the approaches. Results. The comparison shows that military confrontation remains a major theme, but no longer provides the only framework for explaining the relationship. Recent studies give greater attention to diplomatic negotiations, dynastic connections, amanatship, trade, prisoner exchanges and periods of temporary accommodation. They also place the two khanates within a broader political setting shaped by the Kalmyk Khanate and the Russian and Qing Empires. Important disagreements remain, particularly over whether the confrontation should be understood as a continuous struggle or as a changing sequence of warfare, negotiation and compromise. Conclusion. Modern historiography has therefore moved towards a more complex interpretation of Kazakh– Dzungar relations. Further research should examine social, economic and cultural contacts as closely as it has studied military campaigns and high-level diplomacy.