Language Policy and National Identity in Georgia A thesis submitted for the degree of PhD to Queen Mary University of London 2011 Rusudan Amirejibi-Mullen Linguistics Abstract Language has been long recognised as a powerful marker of national identity, as has its role in transforming multi-ethnic societies into unified nations. Such is the case of multi-ethnic and multilingual Georgia, where language has today become a crucial factor in interethnic relations and in the Georgian nation-building process. This thesis sheds light on the nature of kartveloba (Georgianness) by examining Georgian language policy over the entire history of the nation. Despite the country’s long-standing civilisation and its established culture, Georgian statehood began to decline from the second half of the thirteenth century, until the country was eventually incorporated into the Russian empire at the beginning of the nineteenth century. Since then, there have been several attempts to instigate a ‘national revival’: 1) the cultural/linguistic movement of the nineteenth century, 2) the struggle to build a nation-state in 1918-1921, 3) the national liberation movement during the Soviet period (1921-1991), and 4) nation- state building in the post-Soviet period. All of these periods display common features with regard to language policy. 2 After investigating language policy and identity developments in the pre- modern period, this thesis examines Georgia under Russian rule (both Tsarist and Soviet), which made the country vulnerable to ethnic conflicts, and tries to explain the violent outcomes. The thesis goes on to examine public debate of language and minority issues, as well as efforts to elaborate inclusive language and ethnic policies in contemporary Georgia. The main body of the thesis consists of six chapters. The first sets out the nature of the problem, the practical importance of this study, and its methods and structure. The second discusses the main concepts and theoretical considerations. The third traces the development of kartveloba before modern times. The fourth chapter examines the origin of modern national identity, whose main marker was the Georgian language. Chapter five analyses Soviet language policy in the wider context of the ethnic policy and analyses the nationalist aspirations of the Georgians in the twentieth century. Chapter six deals with official policies in the post-Soviet period, but also looks at language practice and attitudes among minority groups. Drawing on primary sources (such as government decrees, laws and other documents, media publications, social surveys and interviews), as well as secondary sources, it seeks to explain how Georgia has dealt with and reflected its multicultural character under different governments. It also investigates the role of language policy in the process of nation-building and makes proposals regarding ways that formulating language policy might help form civic society in Georgia. 3 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 8 1 Introduction 10 1.1 Outlining the problem and the current situation 10 1.2 The scope of the study 12 1.3 The objectives, novelty and practical importance of the study 14 1.4 Methodology 17 1.5 The structure of the thesis 19 2 Key concepts 22 2.1 Ethnicity and ethnic grouping 23 2.1.1 Markers of ethnic identity: objective versus subjective 27 2.1.2 Ethnic identity and historical change 32 2.2 Nations and nationalisms 34 2.2.1 Paradigms of nationalism 38 2.2.2 Typologies of nationalism 44 2.2.3 The ethnic origins of national identity 51 2.3 Marxism-Leninism and nationalism 60 2.3.1 Marxism and the national question 62 2.3.2 The Bolsheviks and the national question before 1917 64 4 2.3.3 Stalin as a theorist of nationalism 70 2.4 Language policy and language planning 77 2.4.1 Linguistic standardisation 79 2.4.2 Standard language and national identity 86 2.4.3 Types of language policy 91 2.5 Conclusion 94 3 Language and identity in pre-modern Georgia 97 3.1 Language in ancient and medieval Georgia 101 3.1.1 Language standardisation after conversion to Christianity (5th – 10th centuries AD) 102 3.1.2 Towards Modern Standard Georgian (11th – 18th centuries AD) 114 3.1.3 The role of standard Georgian for kartveloba in the Middle Ages 121 3.2. Language and identity in medieval Georgia 128 3.2.1 Myths, memories and symbols of the Georgian nation 131 3.2.2 The dominant myth: a special language for a special people 150 3.2.3 A pre-modern nation? 156 4 Language and identity in Georgia under Russian rule 170 4.1 Language and colonialism in Georgia 172 4.1.1 Language and identity in Georgia before incorporation into 5 the Russian empire (1801) 172 4.1.2 The establishment of colonial policy 176 4.1.3 Intensification of linguistic russification 184 4.2 The emergence of the modern Georgian nation 190 4.2.1 Searching for the new boundaries 192 4.2.2 Georgia’s cultural and linguistic resistance to russification 200 4.2.3 Independent Georgia 208 4.3. Conclusion 211 5 Language and identity in Georgia under Soviet rule 213 5.1 Top-down policy 215 5.1.1 Language and the construction of nationalities 218 5.1.2 Russification 228 5.2 Bottom-up policy 242 5.2.1 The impact of Soviet language policy (bottom-up policy versus top-down policy) 244 5.2.2 Top-down and bottom-up policies within Georgia 250 5.2.3 Georgia’s linguistic nationalism 257 6 Language and identity in contemporary Georgia 267 6.1 Language policy: top-down versus bottom-up 270 6.1.1 Language policy before the Rose revolution 271 6 6.1.2 Language policy after the Rose revolution 278 6.1.3 Perceptions and attitudes 288 6.2 Nationalism and national identity in contemporary Georgia 297 6.2.1 Kartveloba – two projects of nation-building: ethno-religious versus secular/civic 298 6.2.2 Language, homeland, faith: nation-building and the Orthodox Church 314 6.3 What future for Georgia? 322 6.3.1 Evaluation of policy 323 6.3.2 Why should, and how can, Georgia become a civic nation? 326 7 Conclusions 335 Bibliography 340 7 Acknowledgements I should not have been able to complete this thesis without the help of my principal supervisor, Dr Leigh Oakes, whose advice and encouragement were invaluable and much appreciated, not to mention his help and patience with my language hardships. I received much personal and academic help from my second supervisor Dr Colleen Cotter. I am most grateful to my advisor Professor Donald Rayfield, whose original advice and deep knowledge of Georgia was an exceptional guide throughout the writing process and who helped me in proof-reading the text. I am honoured that Professor Anthony D. Smith despite his severe illness took time to read critically a part of my dissertation. I am also thankful to Dr Laurence Broers for his insightful comments. Many thanks to my uncle Dr Revaz Lominadze and my cousin Dr Mariam Chkhartishvili, who guided me through the mysteries of Georgia’s history, as well as helping me with access to Georgian archives and libraries. I could not have imagined starting and completing this thesis without my husband, Mark Mullen. I have constantly felt his moral and emotional support. I would like to thank my mother, Nunu, and my children, Nika, Mari, Luka and Taso, who suffered throughout this project without complaint. 8 My thanks to my extended family, my brother Kote, my mother-in-law Anne, my sisters-in-law Teona and Kate and my brother-in-law Jay for their help and kindness. Special thanks to my father-in-law, John, for providing the financial support which allowed me to complete this project. I would like also to thank all my friends and relatives, whose love of, and pride in Georgian language, culture and history provided me with inspiration. This work is dedicated to my best teacher and first friend, my father Nodar, who did not live to see this project, but who always believed in me and encouraged me to pursue an academic career. 9 Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Outlining the problem and the current situation After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the construction of a new national identity for a multiethnic and multilingual population proved to be the most challenging task facing newly independent Georgia. The reason for this lies, on the one hand, in the Soviet legacy of institutionalised ethno-nationalism and ethnic animosities, and, on the other hand, in a strong sense of cultural identity, of kartveloba (Georgianness), deeply rooted in the pre-Soviet past. The process of transforming Georgian society into a political nation and creating a sovereign state is still incomplete. Ethnic minorities in Georgia are largely excluded from the symbolic constitution of nationhood, although all civic duties (such as taxation or military service) fall on them as heavily as on ethnic Georgians, who constitute the majority of the population and who regard the state as exclusively theirs, especially in symbolic areas. In today’s Georgia, ethnic minorities are tolerated, but no effort is made to understand their concerns and cultures. Much of the analysis in this work points out that ethnic Georgians regard all ethnic groups other than Georgian as inferior, and perceive ethnic diversity as a threat to Georgia’s territorial integrity. This can be explained by recent historical experience, when conflicts between different groups in the aftermath of the Soviet collapse developed along ethnic lines in the post-Soviet space. 10 Narratives of disloyal ethnicities were created under the colonial regime, when ethnic minorities were alienated from the majority.