Lived Nationality: Policy and Practice in Soviet Georgia, 1945-1978

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Lived Nationality: Policy and Practice in Soviet Georgia, 1945-1978 University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2015 Lived Nationality: Policy and Practice in Soviet Georgia, 1945-1978 Claire Pogue Kaiser University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the European History Commons, and the Other History Commons Recommended Citation Kaiser, Claire Pogue, "Lived Nationality: Policy and Practice in Soviet Georgia, 1945-1978" (2015). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 1795. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1795 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1795 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Lived Nationality: Policy and Practice in Soviet Georgia, 1945-1978 Abstract This dissertation asks how nation-ness “happens” at the level of experience. Although the Soviet state was founded on principles of Marxism-Leninism, which sought ultimately to transcend national distinctions, the experience of the Soviet project constructed and consolidated rather than dissolved nationality among its multiethnic population. Existing scholarship on Soviet nationality policies has largely focused on the interwar era from Moscow’s perspective, when the state’s distinctive approach toward managing ethnic difference was conceived and initially implemented. Relying on archival materials in Georgian and Russian, this dissertation examines nationality from the viewpoint of the post- World War Two Georgian SSR, when early Soviet nation-building policies gained traction among its multiethnic citizenry. By the late Stalin era (1945-1953), internal understandings of Georgian national identity were closely intertwined with pride in Stalin as a co-national. Newly endowed Soviet institutions of nation-building from this period gave form to nationalizing aspirations of local- and republic-level actors in Georgia, from Party cadres to academics. I refer to these processes as productive and excisional institutions of nation- building. The aftermath of Khrushchev’s revelations in 1956 of Stalin’s crimes marked a crucial turning point in Georgia, yet for different reasons than the resistance, confusion, or hope expressed elsewhere in the USSR. The violent suppression in 1956 of demonstrations in Tbilisi against Khrushchev’s perceived denigration of Stalin as a Georgian national figure compelled a reevaluation of what it meant to be Soviet and Georgian in a post-Stalin society. This reevaluation took place among republic leaders and “ordinary citizens” alike, as a new national-social contract emerged that facilitated the hegemony of the entitled nationality by the late 1970s. From the nationalization of the republic’s capital to negotiation of cultural practices to political mobilization toward national interests, citizens in Georgia increasingly inhabited nationality through – rather than in spite of – Soviet institutions and collectives. This study sheds new light on shifting imperial, republican, and local center-periphery dynamics in the postwar Soviet Union and situates the subtleties of the Georgian case within a broader trajectory of twentieth-century Eurasian nation-building practices. Degree Type Dissertation Degree Name Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Graduate Group History First Advisor Peter Holquist Keywords Caucasus history, Nationalism, Soviet history, Twentieth-Century history Subject Categories European History | History | Other History This dissertation is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1795 LIVED NATIONALITY: POLICY AND PRACTICE IN SOVIET GEORGIA, 1945-1978 Claire Pogue Kaiser A DISSERTATION in History Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of PhilosoPHy 2015 Supervisor of Dissertation: Peter Holquist, Associate Professor of History Graduate Group Chairperson: Benjamin NatHans, Associate Professor of History Dissertation Committee: Peter Holquist, Associate Professor of History, University of Pennsylvania Benjamin NatHans, Ronald S. Lauder EndoWed Term Associate Professor of History, University of Pennsylvania Bruce Grant, Professor of AntHroPology, NeW York University LIVED NATIONALITY: POLICY AND PRACTICE IN SOVIET GEORGIA, 1945-1978 © 2015 Claire Pogue Kaiser iii DEDICATION For Mike iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project Would not have been possible Without the generous contributions and suPPort of a number of individuals and institutions. First and foremost, I tHank Peter Holquist and Ben NatHans for encouraging this project since its inception, providing close readings at every stage of tHe Project, and PusHing me to explore new directions. Bruce Grant’s work was an early inspiration for the Project, and I am grateful for His involvement in its later stages and for helping me to think anthropologically. I feel fortunate to have been at Penn at a time WHen We built a robust cadre of Russianist and Eurasianist graduate students. In particular, I tHank Sam CasPer and Alex Hazanov for their collegiality and friendsHip. I conducted researcH for tHis Project WitH tHe suPPort of tHe American Councils/DePartment of State Title VIII Program for Research and Training on Eastern Europe and tHe IndePendent States of tHe Former Soviet Union, the American ResearcH Institute of tHe SoutH Caucasus, tHe PeW Foundation, and tHe University of Pennsylvania. THe Project also benefited greatly from ParticiPation in two worksHops: the project on “Georgian Nationalism and Soviet PoWer,” organized by Jeremy SmitH; and tHe Hoover Institution WorksHoP on Totalitarian Regimes, organized by Paul Gregory and Mark Harrison. Additionally, feedback from Presentations at a number of otHer conferences and from Maike LeHmann, Ron Suny, Erik Scott, Krista Goff, and Kevin Platt HelPed improve individual cHaPters. In Tbilisi, tHe staff of tHe ArcHive Administration of tHe Ministry of Internal Affairs made my extended researcH Periods Productive, efficient, and enjoyable. I v especially thank Ivane Jakhua, Dodo BagHaturia, and director Omari TusHurasHvili. My Georgian language teacHers Ramaz Kurdadze, Tea Ebralidze, and most of all Nino SHarasHenidze equiPPed me WitH tHe tools necessary to carry out tHe Project I envisioned. Frequent conversations WitH Tim Blauvelt, Oliver Reisner, Giorgi KldiasHvili, and Levan AsabasHvili made for a stimulating intellectual environment in Tbilisi. I came to Russian and Soviet History WHile I was an undergraduate at Georgetown through the dynamism of the late Richard Stites. Nelson Cunningham’s encouragement and counsel Have been invaluable. I tHank my Parents, Paul and Shelley Pogue, for their constant support and for encouraging an interest in history from a young age. Most of all, I tHank my Husband, Mike Kaiser, for joining and suPPorting me on tHis journey. I dedicate tHis Work to Him. vi ABSTRACT LIVED NATIONALITY: POLICY AND PRACTICE IN SOVIET GEORGIA, 1945-1978 Claire Pogue Kaiser Peter Holquist This dissertation asks how nation-ness “happens” at the level of experience. Although the Soviet state Was founded on principles of Marxism-Leninism, WHicH sougHt ultimately to transcend national distinctions, tHe lived exPerience of tHe Soviet project constructed and consolidated rather than dissolved nationality among its multietHnic PoPulation. Existing scholarship on Soviet nationality policies has largely focused on the interwar era from MoscoW’s perspective, when the state’s distinctive aPProacH toWard managing etHnic difference Was conceived and initially implemented. Relying on archival materials in Georgian and Russian, this dissertation examines nationality from tHe vieWPoint of the post-World War Two Georgian SSR, when early Soviet nation-building policies gained traction among its multietHnic citizenry. By the late Stalin era (1945-1953), internal understandings of Georgian national identity were closely intertwined with pride in Stalin as a co-national. Newly endowed Soviet institutions of nation-building from tHis Period gave form to nationalizing aspirations of local- and republic-level actors in Georgia, from Party cadres to academics. I refer to tHese Processes as Productive and excisional institutions of nation-building. THe aftermatH of KhrusHcHev’s revelations in 1956 of Stalin’s crimes marked a crucial turning Point in Georgia, yet for different reasons than the resistance, confusion, or Hope expressed elseWHere in the USSR. THe violent vii suPPression in 1956 of demonstrations in Tbilisi against KHrusHcHev’s Perceived denigration of Stalin as a Georgian national figure compelled a reevaluation of WHat it meant to be Soviet and Georgian in a Post-Stalin society. This reevaluation took Place among rePublic leaders and “ordinary citizens” alike, as a neW national-social contract emerged tHat facilitated tHe Hegemony of tHe entitled nationality by tHe late 1970s. From tHe nationalization of tHe rePublic’s caPital to negotiation of cultural practices to Political mobilization toWard national interests, citizens in Georgia increasingly inhabited nationality through – rather than in spite of – Soviet institutions and collectives. THis study sHeds neW ligHt on sHifting imperial, republican, and local center-PeriPHery dynamics in the postwar Soviet Union and situates the subtleties of the Georgian case Within a broader trajectory of tWentieth- century Eurasian nation-building practices. viii Table of Contents List of Tables ix List of Figures (Maps and Photographs)
Recommended publications
  • Perspectives, Obstacles and the Ongoing Development of CMM/CBM in Georgia Frameworks for Cooperation COMPANY PROFILE COMPANY PROFILE GIG Group and Its Subsidiaries
    Perspectives, Obstacles and the Ongoing Development of CMM/CBM in Georgia Frameworks for Cooperation COMPANY PROFILE COMPANY PROFILE GIG Group and Its Subsidiaries With more than 4000 employed staff Georgian Industrial Group (GIG) is one of the largest industrial conglomerates in Georgia The business of GIG has been expanding quite steadily over the last years by means of acquisitions but also through organic growth e.g. by construction of new generation facilities such as power plants. “One Team - Multiple Energies” OUR ENERGY PORTFOLIO Renewables Coal Mining Thermal Power Plants The company operates hydro power plants GIG owns and operates the only coal mine in The group owns and operates thermal power plants with with a total installed capacity of 50MW. GIG Georgia with the 331 Mt coal extraction a total installed capacity of 600 MW. A 300 MW coal fired furthermore has some 70 MW of hydro and license. Tkibuli Coal mine envisages rising power plant with modern combustion technology is wind energy facilities under planning and annual output up to 1 million tons by 2021. currently under development. development. Electricity Trading CNG Refueling, Natural Gas Trading GIG and it’s subsidiaries are the largest electricity Through its subsidiary NEOGAS, GIG owns and/or trader in Georgia handling export/import, transit and operates 20 CNG refueling stations across Georgia. swap transactions with all of its neighboring Besides, GIG is involved in regional gas trading as well as countries. wholesale trading in Georgia. FURTHER INFORMATION: WWW.GIG.GE http://www.gig.ge/index.php SAKNAKHSHIRI GIG TKIBULI-SHAORI COALFIELD Location, Ownership and Reserves Coal Reserves Ownership Exploration Defined by Total 50%License JORC Area Standards Saknakhshiri 331 Mt 500 Mt 5,479.9 ha GIG 0% Tkibuli 0% Location Tbilisi Tkibuli-Shaori Coalfield locates on the southern slope of the Great Caucasus in the Tkibuli and Ambrolauri Districts to the 200 km northeastward of the capital of Georgia Tbilisi.
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution: EG: Bank of Jandara Lake, Bolnisi, Burs
    Subgenus Lasius Fabricius, 1804 53. L. (Lasius) alienus (Foerster, 1850) Distribution: E.G.: Bank of Jandara Lake, Bolnisi, Bursachili, Gardabani, Grakali, Gudauri, Gveleti, Igoeti, Iraga, Kasristskali, Kavtiskhevi, Kazbegi, Kazreti, Khrami gorge, Kianeti, Kitsnisi, Kojori, Kvishkheti, Lagodekhi Reserve, Larsi, Lekistskali gorge, Luri, Manglisi, Mleta, Mtskheta, Nichbisi, Pantishara, Pasanauri, Poladauri, Saguramo, Sakavre, Samshvilde, Satskhenhesi, Shavimta, Shulaveri, Sighnaghi, Taribana, Tbilisi (Mushtaidi Garden, Tbilisi Botanical Garden), Tetritskaro, Tkemlovani, Tkviavi, Udabno, Zedazeni (Ruzsky, 1905; Jijilashvili, 1964a, b, 1966, 1967b, 1968, 1974a); W.G.: Abasha, Ajishesi, Akhali Atoni, Anaklia, Anaria, Baghdati, Batumi Botanical Garden, Bichvinta Reserve, Bjineti, Chakvi, Chaladidi, Chakvistskali, Eshera, Grigoreti, Ingiri, Inkiti Lake, Kakhaberi, Khobi, Kobuleti, Kutaisi, Lidzava, Menji, Nakalakebi, Natanebi, Ochamchire, Oni, Poti, Senaki, Sokhumi, Sviri, Tsaishi, Tsalenjikha, Tsesi, Zestaponi, Zugdidi Botanical Garden (Ruzsky, 1905; Karavaiev, 1926; Jijilashvili, 1974b); S.G.: Abastumani, Akhalkalaki, Akhaltsikhe, Aspindza, Avralo, Bakuriani, Bogdanovka, Borjomi, Dmanisi, Goderdzi Pass, Gogasheni, Kariani, Khanchali Lake, Ota, Paravani Lake, Sapara, Tabatskuri, Trialeti, Tsalka, Zekari Pass (Ruzsky, 1905; Jijilashvili, 1967a, 1974a). 54. L. (Lasius) brunneus (Latreille, 1798) Distribution: E.G.: Bolnisi, Gardabani, Kianeti, Kiketi, Manglisi, Pasanauri (Ruzsky, 1905; Jijilashvili, 1968, 1974a); W.G.: Akhali Atoni, Baghdati,
    [Show full text]
  • Muslim Communities of Georgia
    AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF ARMENIA Muslim Communities of Georgia: External Influences and Domestic Challenges A MASTER’S ESSAY SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE SCHOOL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS FOR PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE DEGREE OF MASTERS OF ARTS BY AMALYA FLJYAN YEREVAN, ARMENIA MAY 2015 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction………………………………………………………………………………….....4 Islam in Georgia: Background .…………………………………………………..……..6 Chapter 1: Literature Review…………………………………………………………………..8 Research Methodology………………………………………………………………………..14 Chapter 2: External Influences and Muslim Communities of Georgia.……………………....15 2.1 Turkey…………………………………………………………………………......15 2.2 Azerbaijan…………………………………………………………………………28 2.3 Iran………………………………………………………………………………...40 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………...…….45 Bibliography……………………………………………....…………………………………...47 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my gratitude to people who supported me throughout the whole process of work on my Master’s Essay. First and foremost I would like to thank my supervisor Dr. Vahram Ter-Matevosyan. This work would not be possible without his constant support, patience, energy and dedication. The guidance and encouragement provided throughout the whole period of work on my research contributed to the overall development of my work. I was very fortunate to work with you. Further, I would like to thank the American University of Armenia and the Department of Political Science and International Affairs for creating perfect environment for academic studies. I would like specially thank Dr. Yevgenya Paturyan for her help, support and guidance during the course on Research Design. Your advice was very valuable during the first period of work on our Master’s essays. I would like to thank the Program Chair of the Department of Political Science and International for his work as program chair and support in academic endeavors.
    [Show full text]
  • Brand Success Evaluation MAIA SETURI Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia
    Brand Success Evaluation MAIA SETURI Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia Abstract: It is very important for the company to use the trademark and manage them effectively in the working conditions on the competitive market. Trademark (Brand) obsesses the consumer's attention, attracts them and in case of customer’s satisfaction ensures their loyalty. But the brand can’t be considered in unchanged way, even strong and successful brand is evolving and changes over the time. The goal of my research was to study customers’ attitude toward "Borjomi" on Georgian market and to assess the weaknesses, which might be linked to the development of the brand and its further success’s based on the results of the research. There is not still well developed and thought the largest importance of branding in the business of companies commercial success, for example, non-existent work experience of branding in the past. Keywords: Trademark, market, brand, brand effectiveness, branding, brand image, marketing, consumer, loyality, competitive market. Introduction It is very important for the company to use the trademark and manage them effectively in the working conditions on the competitive market. Trademark (Brand) obsesses the consumer's attention, attracts them and in case of customer’s satisfaction ensures their loyalty. “Consumer assesses the identical products depending on how it is branded"(1). But the brand can’t be considered in unchanged way, even strong and successful brand is evolving and changes over the time. Creating a brand is an important and significant first step towards its successful, hard way. Research of the issues related to the brand creation and development is one of the actual (urgent) topics, which is discussed in this paper on the example of Georgian mineral water "Borjomi".
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Prosperity Initiative
    USAID/GEORGIA DO2: Inclusive and Sustainable Economic Growth October 1, 2011 – September 31, 2012 Gagra Municipal (regional) Infrastructure Development (MID) ABKHAZIA # Municipality Region Project Title Gudauta Rehabilitation of Roads 1 Mtskheta 3.852 km; 11 streets : Mtskheta- : Mtanee Rehabilitation of Roads SOKHUMI : : 1$Mestia : 2 Dushet 2.240 km; 7 streets :: : ::: Rehabilitation of Pushkin Gulripshi : 3 Gori street 0.92 km : Chazhashi B l a c k S e a :%, Rehabilitaion of Gorijvari : 4 Gori Shida Kartli road 1.45 km : Lentekhi Rehabilitation of Nationwide Projects: Ochamchire SAMEGRELO- 5 Kareli Sagholasheni-Dvani 12 km : Highway - DCA Basisbank ZEMO SVANETI RACHA-LECHKHUMI rehabilitaiosn Roads in Oni Etseri - DCA Bank Republic Lia*#*# 6 Oni 2.452 km, 5 streets *#Sachino : KVEMO SVANETI Stepantsminda - DCA Alliance Group 1$ Gali *#Mukhuri Tsageri Shatili %, Racha- *#1$ Tsalenjikha Abari Rehabilitation of Headwork Khvanchkara #0#0 Lechkhumi - DCA Crystal Obuji*#*# *#Khabume # 7 Oni of Drinking Water on Oni for Nakipu 0 Likheti 3 400 individuals - Black Sea Regional Transmission ZUGDIDI1$ *# Chkhorotsku1$*# ]^!( Oni Planning Project (Phase 2) Chitatskaro 1$!( Letsurtsume Bareuli #0 - Georgia Education Management Project (EMP) Akhalkhibula AMBROLAURI %,Tsaishi ]^!( *#Lesichine Martvili - Georgia Primary Education Project (G-Pried) MTSKHETA- Khamiskuri%, Kheta Shua*#Zana 1$ - GNEWRC Partnership Program %, Khorshi Perevi SOUTH MTIANETI Khobi *# *#Eki Khoni Tskaltubo Khresili Tkibuli#0 #0 - HICD Plus #0 ]^1$ OSSETIA 1$ 1$!( Menji *#Dzveli
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom of Religion Or Belief in Georgia 2010-2019
    FREEDOM OF RELIGION OR BELIEF IN GEORGIA Report 2010-2019 FREEDOM OF RELIGION OR BELIEF IN GEORGIA REPORT 2010-2019 Tolerance and Diversity Institute (TDI) 2020 The report is prepared by Tolerance and Diversity Institute (TDI) within the framework of East-West Management Institute’s (EWMI) "Promoting Rule of Law in Georgia" (PROLoG) project, funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The report is published with the support from the Open Society Georgia Foundation (OSGF). The content is the sole responsibility of the Tolerance and Diversity Institute (TDI) and does not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), United States Government, East-West Management Institute (EWMI) or Open Society Georgia Foundation (OSGF). Authors: Mariam Gavtadze, Eka Chitanava, Anzor Khatiashvili, Mariam Jikia, Shota Tutberidze, Gvantsa Lomaia Project director: Mariam Gavtadze Translators: Natia Nadiradze, Tamar Kvaratskhelia Design: Tornike Lortkipanidze Cover: shutterstock It is prohibited to reprint, copy or distribute the material for commercial purposes without written consent of the Tolerance and Diversity Institute (TDI). Tolerance and Diversity Institute (TDI), 2020 Web: www.tdi.ge CONTENTS Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................. 8 Methodology ..........................................................................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Sociopolitical Situation in the Northeast Caucasus: Challenges to Nongovernmental Organizations, Andre Kamenshikov, Vladimir Sukhov, and Mikhail Charaev Abstract casien: la Tchetchenie,l'Ingushetie, et Ie high, especially in Karabakh, Abkhazia, Dagestan, dans la perspective de l' Chechnya and Tadjikistan, where huge The authors provide a general analysis of action pratique en matiere d'intervention problems caused by war remain unsolved the sociopolitical situation in three basic charitable et humanitaire. Ces efforts sont such as the problem of hundreds of regions of the Northeast Caucasus, diriges vers une evaluation de thousands of refugees, for whom the road Chechnya, Ingushetia and Dagestan, from 1'interaction et de la mise sur pied de to their homes remains closed. the perspective of practical action in the programmes constructifs au niveau des When speaking about the reaction area of humanitarian and charitable organisations internationales et non- demonstrated by the global community in activities there. These efforts are directed gouvernementales, autant qu' au niveau reply to the arising problems and crises, it toward assisting the interaction and im- des initiatives individuelles. Les auteurs is important to note the following: plementation of constructive programs on citent donc des exemples d' organisations • First, the rapid development of events the level of international and ayant eu du succes dans la mise en place and the occurrence ofnumerous crises nongovernmental organizations, as well as de telles initiatives. Ils decrivent aussi un in the post-Soviet territory was largely on the level of individual initiatives. Thus, certain nombre de projets en unexpected (despite some predictions the authors cite examples of organizations preparations.
    [Show full text]
  • 2.1.1~2.1.4 95/06/12
    Appendices Appendix-1 Member List of the Study Team (1) Field Survey 1. Dr. Yoshiko TSUYUKI Team Leader/ Technical Official, Experts Service Division, Technical Advisor Bureau of International Cooperation International Medical Center of Japan, Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare 2. Mr. Hideo EGUCHI Security Control Deputy Resident Representative, Planner United Kingdom Office (JICA) 3. Mr. Yoshimasa TAKEMURA Project Coordinator Staff, Second Management Division, Grant Aid Management Department (JICA) 4. Mr. Yoshiharu HIGUCHI Project Manager CRC Overseas Cooperation Inc. 5. Dr. Tomoyuki KURODA Health Sector Surveyor CRC Overseas Cooperation Inc. 6. Mr. Hiroshi MORII Equipment Planner CRC Overseas Cooperation Inc. 7. Mr. Haruo ITO Equipment Planner / CRC Overseas Cooperation Inc. Cost and Procurement Planner 8. Ms. Rusudan PIRVELI Interpreter CRC Overseas Cooperation Inc. (2) Explanation of Draft Report 1. Dr. Yoshiko TSUYUKI Team Leader/ Technical Official, Experts Service Division, Technical Advisor Bureau of International Cooperation International Medical Center of Japan, Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare 2. Mr. Yoshimasa TAKEMURA Project Coordinator Staff, Second Management Division, Grant Aid Management Department (JICA) 3. Mr. Yoshiharu HIGUCHI Project Manager CRC Overseas Cooperation Inc. 4. Mr. Hiroshi MORII Equipment Planner CRC Overseas Cooperation Inc. 5. Ms. Rusudan PIRVELI Interpreter CRC Overseas Cooperation Inc. A-1 Appendix-2 Study Schedule (1) Field Survey No. Date Movement Activities Accommodation 1 Apr. 5 (Sat) Narita→Frankfurt Frankfurt (A) (B) (D) (A) (C) (D) 2 Apr. 6 (Sun) Frankfurt→Baku Baku (A) (C) (D) (A) (C) (D) 3 Apr. 7 (Mon) Baku→A) (C) (D) Visit the Embassy of Japan in Baku Train (A) (C) (D) London→(B) (A) (C) (D) Flight (B) (F) (G) Narita→Vienna→ (F) (G) 4 Apr.
    [Show full text]
  • Annexation of Georgia in Russian Empire
    1 George Anchabadze HISTORY OF GEORGIA SHORT SKETCH Caucasian House TBILISI 2005 2 George Anchabadze. History of Georgia. Short sketch Above-mentioned work is a research-popular sketch. There are key moments of the history of country since ancient times until the present moment. While working on the sketch the author based on the historical sources of Georgia and the research works of Georgian scientists (including himself). The work is focused on a wide circle of the readers. გიორგი ანჩაბაძე. საქართველოს ისტორია. მოკლე ნარკვევი წინამდებარე ნაშრომი წარმოადგენს საქართველოს ისტორიის სამეცნიერ-პოპულარულ ნარკვევს. მასში მოკლედაა გადმოცემული ქვეყნის ისტორიის ძირითადი მომენტები უძველესი ხანიდან ჩვენს დრომდე. ნარკვევზე მუშაობისას ავტორი ეყრდნობოდა საქართველოს ისტორიის წყაროებსა და ქართველ მეცნიერთა (მათ შორის საკუთარ) გამოკვლევებს. ნაშრომი განკუთვნილია მკითხველთა ფართო წრისათვის. ISBN99928-71-59-8 © George Anchabadze, 2005 © გიორგი ანჩაბაძე, 2005 3 Early Ancient Georgia (till the end of the IV cen. B.C.) Existence of ancient human being on Georgian territory is confirmed from the early stages of anthropogenesis. Nearby Dmanisi valley (80 km south-west of Tbilisi) the remnants of homo erectus are found, age of them is about 1,8 million years old. At present it is the oldest trace in Euro-Asia. Later on the Stone Age a man took the whole territory of Georgia. Former settlements of Ashel period (400–100 thousand years ago) are discovered as on the coast of the Black Sea as in the regions within highland Georgia. Approximately 6–7 thousands years ago people on the territory of Georgia began to use as the instruments not only the stone but the metals as well.
    [Show full text]
  • The Security of the Caspian Sea Region
    16. The Georgian–Abkhazian conflict Alexander Krylov I. Introduction The Abkhaz have long populated the western Caucasus. They currently number about 100 000 people, speak one of the languages of the Abkhazo-Adygeyan (west Caucasian) language group, and live in the coastal areas on the southern slopes of the Caucasian ridge and along the Black Sea coast. Together with closely related peoples of the western Caucasus (for example, the Abazins, Adygeyans and Kabardians (or Circassians)) they play an important role in the Caucasian ethno-cultural community and consider themselves an integral part of its future. At the same time, the people living in coastal areas on the southern slopes of the Caucasian ridge have achieved broader communication with Asia Minor and the Mediterranean civilizations than any other people of the Caucasus. The geographical position of Abkhazia on the Black Sea coast has made its people a major factor in the historical process of the western Caucasus, acting as an economic and cultural bridge with the outside world. Georgians and Abkhaz have been neighbours from time immemorial. The Georgians currently number about 4 million people. The process of national consolidation of the Georgian nation is still far from complete: it includes some 20 subgroups, and the Megrelians (sometimes called Mingrelians) and Svans who live in western Georgia are so different in language and culture from other Georgians that it would be more correct to consider them as separate peoples. Some scholars, Hewitt, for example,1 suggest calling the Georgian nation not ‘Georgians’ but by their own name, Kartvelians, which includes the Georgians, Megrelians and Svans.2 To call all the different Kartvelian groups ‘Georgians’ obscures the true ethnic situation.
    [Show full text]
  • Georgian Country and Culture Guide
    Georgian Country and Culture Guide მშვიდობის კორპუსი საქართველოში Peace Corps Georgia 2017 Forward What you have in your hands right now is the collaborate effort of numerous Peace Corps Volunteers and staff, who researched, wrote and edited the entire book. The process began in the fall of 2011, when the Language and Cross-Culture component of Peace Corps Georgia launched a Georgian Country and Culture Guide project and PCVs from different regions volunteered to do research and gather information on their specific areas. After the initial information was gathered, the arduous process of merging the researched information began. Extensive editing followed and this is the end result. The book is accompanied by a CD with Georgian music and dance audio and video files. We hope that this book is both informative and useful for you during your service. Sincerely, The Culture Book Team Initial Researchers/Writers Culture Sara Bushman (Director Programming and Training, PC Staff, 2010-11) History Jack Brands (G11), Samantha Oliver (G10) Adjara Jen Geerlings (G10), Emily New (G10) Guria Michelle Anderl (G11), Goodloe Harman (G11), Conor Hartnett (G11), Kaitlin Schaefer (G10) Imereti Caitlin Lowery (G11) Kakheti Jack Brands (G11), Jana Price (G11), Danielle Roe (G10) Kvemo Kartli Anastasia Skoybedo (G11), Chase Johnson (G11) Samstkhe-Javakheti Sam Harris (G10) Tbilisi Keti Chikovani (Language and Cross-Culture Coordinator, PC Staff) Workplace Culture Kimberly Tramel (G11), Shannon Knudsen (G11), Tami Timmer (G11), Connie Ross (G11) Compilers/Final Editors Jack Brands (G11) Caitlin Lowery (G11) Conor Hartnett (G11) Emily New (G10) Keti Chikovani (Language and Cross-Culture Coordinator, PC Staff) Compilers of Audio and Video Files Keti Chikovani (Language and Cross-Culture Coordinator, PC Staff) Irakli Elizbarashvili (IT Specialist, PC Staff) Revised and updated by Tea Sakvarelidze (Language and Cross-Culture Coordinator) and Kakha Gordadze (Training Manager).
    [Show full text]
  • Georgia Focus Group Research
    A PROJECT OF THE INTERNATIONAL REPUBLICAN INSTITUTE GEORGIA FOCUS GROUP RESEARCH QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC OPINION TRENDS FOLLOWING THE 2020 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS GEORGIA FOCUS GROUP RESEARCH QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC OPINION TRENDS FOLLOWING THE 2020 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS Center for Insights in Survey Research IRI.org @IRIglobal © 2021 All Rights Reserved Georgia Focus Group Research: Qualitative Analysis of Public Opinion Trends Following the 2020 Parliamentary Elections Copyright © 2021 International Republican Institute. All rights reserved. Permission Statement: No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system without the written permission of the International Republican Institute. Requests for permission should include the following information: • The title of the document for which permission to copy material is desired. • A description of the material for which permission to copy is desired. • The purpose for which the copied material will be used and the manner in which it will be used. • Your name, title, company or organization name, telephone number, fax number, e-mail address and mailing address. Please send all requests for permission to: Attn: Department of External Affairs International Republican Institute 1225 Eye Street NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20005 [email protected] IRI | Georgia - Focus Group Research Following 2020 Elections 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In April 2021, IPM Market Intelligence Caucasus, on Key Findings behalf of the International Republican Institute’s (IRI) Center for Insights in Survey Research, conducted a — Participants do not see a way out of the political qualitative study of public attitudes toward the 2020 crisis and are frustrated by the inability of the ruling parliamentary elections and recent political events in party and opposition to engage in constructive Georgia.
    [Show full text]