Religious and National Aspects of Georgian Muslim Women's Identity

CEU eTD Collection Religious and National Aspects ofGeorgian Muslim Women's Identity In partial fulfillment of the requirements ofthe fulfillment forIn partial of degree the in the Autonomous the in Republic ofAdjara Advisor: Professor Laszlo Pap Andras Nationalism Studies Program Central European University Budapest, Hungary Inga Popovaite Master of Arts Master ofArts Submitted toSubmitted 2014 by CEU eTD Collection these arguments.these supports observation participant from data as well as analysis interview The a role. women's of perception mentioned above the by explained partially be also can This boundaries. group strengthen and values group shared their preserve and strategy accommodation an employ to tend respondents the status, minority religious inferior the leaving of instead Also, group. social a of reproduction cultural and biological for responsible ones the being as well as boundaries, group social of protectors as role perceived their by explained partially be can a experience women discrepancy this identity,and their of Muslim aspects Muslim and Georgian the between Georgian discrepancy that the argue in I observation Adjara. participant of Republic and Autonomous interviews semi-structured on based is It identity. This thesis analyzes the religious and national aspects of Georgian Muslim women's Muslim Georgian of aspects national and religious the analyzes thesis This Abstract i

CEU eTD Collection and forinspiringin conversations and Tbilisi. their forato lives. warm welcome Khuloand other villages from Women Union, Muslim from Union, Muslim Georgian from people to interviews; the during tongue and ears my being for Mtvarisa and Kristina Inga, Ana, to Batumi; in assistance and help her for Inaishvili Nino to community; their and family their to me welcoming for Nazeni and Aslan to field; the entering help her for Chitanava Eka to field; the entering help and twoyears. and enlightening challenging for Studies Nationalism of Department the all to goes you thank big A writing. of process the through me guided that feedback and comments their for Kovacs Andras and Pogony journey,intellectual ofit. milestones thesis isone ofthe and this an of beginning the was This Georgia. to moved and job my left I when especially decisions, And last but not least, I want to thank Iwant to least, thank And but not last the all time. forme forbeingAndrew there thesis the of version final the on remarks and comments her for Inge thank to want I advice constant comments, valuable time, his for Baramidze Ruslan to grateful am I Szabolc professors Pap, L. Andras professor supervisor my thank to want also I life my all to support unconditional their for parents my thank to want I all, of First Acknowledgments ii

CEU eTD Collection Bibliography 7.ConclusionChapter Muslim 6.Staying Chapter 5.DifficultiesChapter a Georgian ofBeing Muslim Description 4.Research Chapter Framework Legal 3.3 Existing 3.GeorgianChapter in Orthodox Church Adjara 2. Chapter ChristianThe Georgian Muslim andOther the 1. Chapter BackgroundTheoretical Introduction 5.3 Different Regulations In-Group Georgian from5.2 Exclusion the by Nation to Muslims Other Nationality Assigning Grounds HistoricalDiscourse onReligious Using 5.1 Exclusion Participants 4.1 Interview to3.6 Conversions Christianity Space3.5 Religionin Public Institutions 3.4 Educational and3.2 Local State ReligioninAuthorities 1990s and in Revival Georgia3.1 Religious and Adjara 2.2 IdentityShifts in Adjara ofGeorgia the Narrative 2.1OrthodoxChristianityNational in ofConversion Instead 1.3 Keeping Faith Islamic andIdentityofGeorgian National 1.2 Religious Muslim Women 1.1 Definitionof Terms 2.2.3 Return of religions and the Muslim andOther the ofreligions 2.2.3 Return --Identification fromto Self Religious National 2.2.2 Shift IdentityReference the as Main 2.2.1 Islam ...... Table ofContents ...... iii ...... 71 66 60 55 51 47 47 40 39 36 34 33 29 28 26 26 22 19 16 16 13 12 10 9 4 4 1 CEU eTD Collection 5 4 3 2 1 view. of point male's a from written is Pelkmans, by identity Muslims' Georgian of account detailed most the even perspective: masculine a from mostly discussed been have literature, scholarly local in and well. as Bulgaria, in Pomaks Adjarians of case the that noted be should it Here population. the of majority the with religion same the share not do they as nation, narrative, national Georgian the of part integral Islam Transformation andReligious in Adjara Chikovani, andGeorgia: IslamModern “Christianity in andResponses”; Searchfor Experience, Liles, Challenges The “Islam Post-Soviet in Georgia1”; “Islam Baramidze, in Adjara - Comparative Analysis of Two in Communities Adjara”; Pelkmans, Brunnbauer, Minority Nation-State Identities: “Histories and Discourses. and Bulgarian CasePomaks.” ofThe the Dimitrova, “BosniakNation or Dilemmaofwith Muslim? One Two Names.” Muslim Georgian later term usedHere indicate this and to Muslims from term it with GeorgianAdjara; used is interchangeably Today: of Millennium.” the New Facing the Challenges Selves of Muslim Georgians”; Georgia”; Pelkmans,“Religion, in State Nation and Chedia, “Georgian Nationalism andChurch”; Batiashvili, Khalvashi “Georgian Identity:and Narratives State Ideology vs.Narrative National Elite State the Georgian onthe Current Lilienfeld, of “Reflections Georgian “The and Nation”; Jones, Church Orthodox 5 Afwatce htaeaotGoga ulmwmnwomen Muslim Georgian about are that articles few A soul Ican notsoul and change it. (INT10) but my grandmother and grandfather, my parents Muslims. are all inmyheart isThis religion and Christianity, so But whyareyou Muslim?my :I answer knowa aboutGeorgian still is that lot history of Georgia,howwe our – hereinreligion lost Christianity – Adjara, knowmany you aboutthings whyPeople ask me everyday: Muslim? are you You teacher,are a you about know many things history To this day, the questions encompassing ethnic Georgian Muslim identity both in international in both identity Muslim Georgian ethnic encompassing questions the day, this To and country Christian predominantly a is Georgia As Defending the BorderDefending the 4 have to redefine their national identity against the surrounding Christian society Christian surrounding the against identity national their redefine to have ; George; and Sanikidze, Islamic Georgia”; “Islam in Practices and Balci Motika, 2 is not unique: Bosniaks in Bosnia and Hercegovina, and Bosnia in Bosniaks unique: not is . Introduction 1 Muslim Georgians are partially excluded from the from excluded partially are Georgians Muslim 1

Georgian Orthodox Christianity is an is Christianity Orthodox Georgian identity either do not concentrate on concentrate not do either identity 3 as well as well as

CEU eTD Collection 11 10 9 8 7 6 between composition Adjara and Georgia overall. religious the in difference the illustrate nevertheless they salt, of grain a with taken be should numbers the of followers the of Muslim. percentage Sunni as the time, themselves same regarded the At percent) (30.6 people thousand Orthodox Georgian themselves considered Christians. 83.9 and Muslims themselves considered excluded) and Abkhazia Ossetia (South population million 4.4 total of out percent 9.9 that show did it However, time. the at in was Georgia that disorder of 2002, state the in considering dubious conducted is reliability was its although Georgia in census official last The country. the in live actually Muslims Georgia.However, of i rest the in than higher is here population Muslim everydaysituations. result life in a experienceas which they discomfort despite Christianity, Orthodox Georgian to converting from refrain to decision their underlines reason same The identity. woman Muslim Georgian the of aspects Muslim and Georgian between discrepancies existing explain partially can continuation, cultural and biological its for responsible ones the as and to converting Georgian andthey when resist self-identification Muslim OrthodoxChristianity. and Georgian their negotiate they when protectors boundary group of duty perceived their perform Adjara in women Muslim Georgian how analyzing by gap literature this in fill to intend I Therefore, Adjara, from Muslims Georgian Ibid., 133. official Georgia) national of census Saqartvelos mosakhleobis p’irveli 2002ts’lis erovnuli saq’oveltan aghts’eris(Thethe 2002first shedegebi of Results George Islamic Georgia.” “Islam in Practices and Sanikidze, Batumi. ofThe republic autonomous Adjara is westernGeorgia in onthe borderwith Turkey. of city The capital Adjara is Gelovani, “Women Georgia: in Trace of Islam.” Badashvili, “Muslim Women’s Post-Soviet in Georgia.” IdentityIssues Historically, Adjara Historically, boundaries, group social of preservers as women of role perceived the that argue I thesis, my In 10

In Adjara, the percentage of Muslims was higher: out of total 376 thousand people, 115 people, thousand 376 total of out higher: was Muslims of percentage the Adjara, In Georgian Orthodox Church in Adjara was 63.9 percent. 63.9 was Adjara in Church Orthodox Georgian 8 used to belong to the Ottoman Empire, hence, the percentage of the of percentage the hence, Empire, Ottoman the to belong to used 6 , 132. or focus on Georgian Muslim women from a a from women Muslim Georgian on focus or 2 t is hard to estimate how many how estimate to hard is t historical perspective. historical 11 Thus, even if these if even Thus, 9 7

CEU eTD Collection 12 and Georgians as self-dentification their of renegotiation constant the to leads groups two between position this preservers, boundary as perceived are women As Others. Muslim constructed the and Georgians Christian the between Muslims Georgian positioned and boundaries, intergroup salient more to led 1990s, early and 1980s late the in nationalism Georgian of revival the later and union, Soviet the in secularism century,forced 19th the the in nationalism Georgian of birth the that argue I nutshell, now.a until In up century 19th late the from changed Christians Georgian versus Muslims Georgian of position the how show chapter,I second the chapter. In first the in thesis my of background theoretical emerged differences not interviewsthe and in them. between a not that patterns similar the is into looking was I as upper Adjara, and research lower between study case comparative this that noted be must it However, issues. identity women Muslim Georgian of picture comprehensive more a capture to order in upper Adjara in Khulo of district the in and Batumi of Batumi. culture urban strong career-oriented, more and religious, less the by influenced are who lowlanders, than way more be to positive more a education in religious and view life religious in actively more participate they religious, tend highlanders the religiosity: in differ Adjara in communities Muslim lowland and softwareRQDA. research qualitative with the and categorized coded later and English in transcribed English), or Russian to translation with (Georgian languages three in recorded were interviews community.The Muslim the of leaders religious the of one of family a with Khulo of district the in stay my during gathered was that data including Adjara, of part mountainous the in Khulo of district the in and Batumi in occupations and ages various of women with conducted Ruslan Baramidze, “Islam Baramidze, Ruslan in Adjara -- Comparative Analysis of Two in Communities Adjara.” I start my thesis by discussing the terms that will be used throughout the thesis and provide a provide and thesis the throughout used be will that terms the discussing by thesis my start I highland the Baramidze, to chance. According by selected not were interviews of locations The interviews semi-structured sixteen of analysis the on based is thesis the of part empirical The 12 Therefore my research on Georgian Muslim women identity was conducted both in both conducted wason Georgianidentity research women my Muslim Therefore 3

CEU eTD Collection Christianity as well. In the last chapter I provide the conclusion and questions for possible further possible researches. for questions and conclusion the provide I chapter to last the converting In from well. them as keeps Christianity values group social the the that of protectors 4) as and women Islam of from role converting perceived from them keeps boundaries groups the of keepers main the as women of role perceived the 3) that hypotheses my support to further observation participant the from as well as interviews the from findings the discuss I chapter, sixth the identity. In their of aspects Georgian and Muslim the between experience boundary they discrepancy the for social account partially can protectors as women of role perceived the 2) that and identity their of aspects Georgian and 1) that hypotheses my for support and evidence provides interviews the The in Khulo. encountered themes of broad district three of the analysis in observation participant the as well as interviews, the from findings the discuss and present I chapter, fifth following the In interviewees. the all of description a provide Orthodox Georgian as nowadays, option positionthe morestate. in privileged have a Christians default the necessarily not is Muslim remaining that illustrate to meant is chapter This state. the from support legislative and educational physical, through region Islamic former the in expansion its and Adjara in position Church's Orthodox Georgian the on concentrate chapter,I third the In groups. respective both to belonging perceived their of and Muslims, In the fourth chapter, I discuss the methodology of the conducted research in more detail and detail more in research conducted the of methodology the discuss I chapter, fourth the In Georgian Muslim women in Adjara experience a discrepancy between their Muslim their between discrepancy a experience in Adjara women Muslim Georgian 4

CEU eTD Collection 18 17 16 15 14 employing by 13 achieved be could This nation. the of mind collective the on latter the of impact the as well as religion and nationalism between relations complex the analyze to tools right the provide not invented are traditions the and Cooper.suggested byBrubaker community. imagined an to belonging Georgian as self-identification it. with self-identification their despite nation Georgian of part as perceived not are women Muslim Georgian situations many self-identification. called category separate a outsiders”. specified to antipathy even or difference felt a and members group fellow with oneness or solidarity broad a of felt a both instead involving group, bounded distinctive, a to belonging of sense laden use “emotionally discussing to accurate more are groupness and connectedness communality, as terms such that identity. suggest of They aspects different distinguishing by definition group. social a to belonging their from derives that perception Gellner, Ranger,Hobsbawm and Anderson, Ibid., 41. Brubaker, Tajfel, However, the modernist school of nationalism that Anderson belongs to, with its main ideas that ideas that main nationalism However, of its with school to, modernist the belongs Anderson self individual's an of part a is identity Tajfelsocial by goes, definition the identity? As is What Human Groups Categories andSocial Nationalism 14 Brubaker and Cooper put another component of Tajfel's definition (“self-perception”) into Tajfel's(“self-perception”) of definition component another put Cooper and Brubaker Ethnicity WithoutEthnicity Groups Imagined CommunitiesImagined . The Invention Tradition of 17 Hence when I discuss Georgian national identity in general, I mean both the both mean I general, in identity national Georgian discuss I when Hence , nations are products of modernity of products are nations , and . , 46. a perception of groupness – or, paraphrasing Anderson, a sense of sense a Anderson, paraphrasing or, – groupness of perception a Chapter 1. Theoretical Background 16 However, in the more in-depth in-depth more the However,in 1.1 Definitionof Terms , chap. 12. , chap. 15 . My research proved that this distinction is crucial as in as crucial is distinction this that proved research My 5 13 18 Brubaker and Cooper contribute to this to contribute Cooper and Brubaker , and the community is imagined, does imagined, is community the and , discussion, I will employ terms employ will I discussion, em iett when identity term

CEU eTD Collection 22 21 20 19 the but itself, by important so it that the forms. lies groupboundaries ofit in importance not is canons Islamic of content the follows, that argumentation group. religious given a towards behavior and attitudes outgroup the determines also it boundaries, group the strengthens and defines only not others the of beliefs religious the and community religious given a between differences the other; each with accordance in are beliefs group and beliefs personal the as group specific the to reference of frame a gives it membership; group the unify Bar-Talas group beliefs, social shared common of the concept beliefs group puts it. social shared These Church. a called community moral single one into individuals unites and things sacred to relates which practices and beliefs of system unified a as religion defines Durkheim it. of content the on emphasis the putting then rather performs, religion that function social the on concentrate and religion to approach Durkheim's following am I that stress to need I Here community. Muslim wider the to belongs she that feels time same the at and Muslim, members” memories territory, historic an sharing “population a to Georgianbelongs identified inclusiveness. and solidarity national for basis a provide elites, nationalistic modern by interpreted and constructed are they ways the and traditions, and memories symbols, myths, the all (despite se per ideas criticism) modernistic reject not does which approach ethnosymbolic Smith's Bar-Tal, Social Expression Beliefs “Group as of an Identity.” Durkheim, Smith, Smith, hn I tl bu ru onais I flo ht Lmn n Moln and Lamont what follow I boundaries group about talk I When self-identifies person a that entails identity Muslim the thought, of line same the Following National Identity Myths the Nation andMemoriesof , a mass, public culture, a common economy and common legal rights and duties for all for duties and rights legal common and economy common a culture, public mass, a , group, because belonging to the same congregation functions as an important indicator of indicator important an as functions congregation same the to belonging because group, 20 but rather builds upon them. The main claims of ethnosymbolism are that common ethnic common that are ethnosymbolism of claims main The them. upon builds rather but (emphasis added) The Elementary Forms of Religious Life FormsReligious The Elementary of , 14. , chap. Introduction., chap. 21 This definition directly corresponds to a more modern more a to corresponds directly definition This , 46. 6 22 Therefore, for the discussion and discussion the for Therefore, common myths and historical and myths common 19 Following Smith, a self- a Smith, Following á al “s call r ymbolic as a as

CEU eTD Collection 26 25 24 23 a as well as history, throughout roles gender for force legitimatizing significant a been has religion ofthe nation. biological reproduction in boundary maintenance, and reproduction cultural in nation, the of myths common the and imagination common in Gender embedded differ. are denomination differences religious a in or nation a in experiences male and female that argues gender,on reflections no have religion and nationality on literature mainstream the of gender.majority A– vast discussed be to in a community. arepart taking oroutlook ofsharing behavior processes social life”. daily of rituals and stories, gossip, language, as informalcultural as well forms,andas ceremonies, art practices, beliefs, ritual including meaning, of vehicles symbolic “of consists culture her, to Swidler. According by proposed definition the adapt I thesis my for term, this of definitions contradicting various and approaches different the level. the exist intersubjective at boundaries and social as are real as they interaction, social social or segregation racial of and character shaping and restrictive class on take instantly not of do boundaries symbolic Although patterns exclusion. clear into – boundaries social into turn could they boundaries, symbolic on agreement general a is there If reality. define to groups and individuals allow which tools as serve and boundaries these similarity group; one to of belonging individuals feelings among membership foster and groups create boundaries Symbolic categories. in space and time even practice, people, objects, put to individuals help which distinctions conceptual boundaries”: Yuval-Davis, Nation Nationality”; Woodhead, Differences “Gender Religious in and Practices Significance”; Yuval-Davis, Mayer, Swidler, “Culture in 273. Action,” andLamont Molnár, Sciences,” StudySocial 168–169. in “The of Boundaries the The same applies to religion. As argued by Azzam, following a Foucaldian line of thought, of line Foucaldian a following Azzam, by argued As religion. to applies same The needs that dimension third a is identity,there religious and national of terms the defining After debates extensive into engaging Without “culture”. is clarification needs that term Another . Gender IroniesGender Nationalism of Gender andNationGender 25 however, my thesis will support the arguments of the opposing school which school opposing the argumentsthe of however,support will thesis my . ; Sheila; EthnicityAllen, “Identity: and Feminist on‘Race’, Perspectives 7 Through the means of these symbolic vehicles the vehicles symbolic these of means the Through 24 26 Gender and Gender practices such practices 23 on

CEU eTD Collection 32 31 30 29 28 27 clothing behavior,“proper” “proper” situations life everyday common more in even but killings, honor of case extreme the by illustrated be can honor collectivity's the of bearers symbolic the as women of well. as collective the of and family the of future the representing thus imagination, collective the in children to tied are they well: as ways other in collectivity symbolize women that out guests). their to hospitable and enemies their to (fierce image national accepted the of essence very the embodying hence guests, greet to hand another in wine of goblet a and enemies from protect to hand one in sword a holding and hill a of top the from Tbilisi overlooking statue huge collectively”. and personally honor,both and identity below.detail more in explained be will maintenance boundary and reproduction cultural in role women's the only mother. the Thus, of religion the despite Muslim is father their if society Muslim into born are children the Islam to comes it when denominations, different in regulations different are there religion of case be to is nation a join to individual for way common most the as explanatory religion. orthe nation same the same to different will nationalbe identity oftheir ofwomen and men evenbelong if thethey experiences Hence perspectives. and experiences mens mainly capturing is approach gender-neutral that argumentation by overviewed Woodhead relations, religion and gender on studies of variety religion. given a of representatives the from culture or society native their of practices and values beliefs, shared the learns person a which through processes enculturation or socialization for vehicle Yuval Davis, -- “«МужчинаPiltz, Madlen, Женщина, И И Мать».” Защитник Ibid., 45. Yuval-Davis, Woodhead, Differences “Gender and in Practices Significance.” Religious Azzam, According to Yuval-Davis, women “are constructed as the symbolic bearers of the collectivity's the of bearers symbolic the as to Yuval-Davis,constructed According “are women considered be almost could collectivity a of reproduction biological in women of role The Gender andReligion Gender Gender andNationGender Gender and NationGender , xxi. , 26. , 45. 8 30 An example – Mother Georgia (Kartlis Deda), a Deda), (Kartlis Georgia Mother – example An 28 born in it. in born of line the supports also 31 Yuval-Davispoints 32 The construction The 29 Even if in a in if Even self- 27 A

CEU eTD Collection 37 36 35 34 33 backwards more a as Islam see themselves Muslims Georgian the of some as future the of ideas the to and relations, Muslim and Christian Georgian discussing are outsiders the when positions identity a in guest a or host a of role the performing with connected is it when especially roles, social performing in tensions are the to Adjara connected in men Muslim Georgian among identities – Georgian and Muslim – both maintaining Islam, with associated often are enemies external Moreover, group. this from missing is identity national of idea the of pillar religious the as nation Georgian the from excluded partially least at are Georgians Muslim identity. national distinct their preserving thus religion, and language Georgian of this preserving in succeeded Georgians the stones enemies, external of invasions repeated despite and culture, corner are Christianity Orthodox and language Georgian narrative: Georgian different bysheddingonthe light asapproach and men ofboth Georgian experiences women Muslims. and studiesidentity, in ofsocial nationalism field mainstream thesis willgender-specific my supportthe beings”, human non-gendered subjectivity,of non-gendered a of representative be to taken are theboundaries”. whichcollectivity's signifies “embodyline the for women inherent part of a Georgianinherent of a part social culture. A Georgian involvesand led that bya is feast toastmaster. cuisine traditional and of is the tradition toasting Supra an in -- andBalci Georgia,” “Islam Motika, Post Soviet 336–337. Muslim Georgians.” Batiashvili,Khalvashi “Georgian and of vs.Narrative NationalElite and Identity: Selves Narratives State Ideology Sheila Feminist Nationality,” EthnicityAllen, “Identity: and on‘Race’, Perspectives 55. Ibid., 46. ned sPlmn eerho erinMsi dniysoe,tethe showed, identity Muslim Georgian on research Pelkmans as Indeed, national the in emphasized are aspects following two the argues, Batiashvili and Khalvashi As men while <...> men to relation in defined are women <...>that “[p]erception the despite Hence 36

thus classifying the Muslim Georgians thethus classifying Muslim from the as Other.Adjara 1.2 Religious andIdentityofGeorgian National 1.2 Religious Muslim Women supra 37 and consuming alcohol and pork, to being forced to chose to forced being to pork, and alcohol consuming and 9 35 TeeThese 33

aspects suggest that suggest aspects main difficulties in difficulties main 34 in the in

CEU eTD Collection 41 40 39 38 these group values. social and cultural religious of keepers main the as perceived are men, not women, And well. as ethnic even and cultural as but identity, religious of definition a as only not perceived is Islam time, same the at and Church, Orthodox Georgian the to belonging with intertwined closely is identity national Georgian of idea the layers: cultural and religious contain itself Muslimness, inargue Georgianness both,the the and that --awareness” when self empire. Ottoman was ofthe Adjara a part “ethnic calls she what even and culture Georgian Georgianlanguage, traditions, Georgian of preservers and protectors main the were women Muslim that claims research ethnographic Her preservation. value men. than and lessempowered life visible less be to seem women practice, traditional and religious in roles gender established the to due era, boundaries, and culture community Soviet Islamic of keepers main the the were men, the not during and women, although that argues She ideology. abstract an as just not and identity, simultaneously were enemy”. and potential brother they selves'; 'incomplete rather were but 'others' complete not were Muslims Orthodoxy. Georgian than religion Gelovani, “Women Georgia: in Trace of Islam,” 319. Badashvili, “Muslim Women’s Post-Soviet in Georgia.” IdentityIssues Ibid., 140. Pelkmans, 2. 1. Merging together Gelovani's, Badashvili's, Khalvashi's and Batiashvili's arguments, we could we arguments, Batiashvili's and Khalvashi's Badashvili's, Gelovani's, together Merging group in role important an played women Muslim Georgian that argues Gelovani addition, In cultural their as Islam perceive Georgia in women Muslim Badashvili, to According The perceived role of women as social boundary protectors can partially account for the for account partially can and Georgian Muslim experiencebetween oftheir they discrepancy identity. aspects protectors boundary social as women of role perceived The identity; oftheir aspects Georgian and Muslim between discrepancy a experience Adjara in women Muslim Georgian Defending the BorderDefending the 39 , 125–133. 40 38

But he argues that in the national imagery of Georgians. “Ajarian Georgians. of imagery national the in that argues he But Hence I hypothesize that: Ihypothesize Hence 10 41 and ethnic and in public in

CEU eTD Collection 46 45 44 43 42 conceivable no are there and quo status existing the this ofchangeinferiority. in possibilities of legitimacy perceived a is there when accepted is position inferior The terms. own their in themselves describing and position inferior this of rejection the and society in majority the by prescribed position inferior the of acceptance the between continuum a on put be could available solutions the all However, group. this of environment social the on depend that encounter groups minority that problems the to solutions psychological possible Church-affiliated or Church-run in pressure institutions. educational peer or Islam with affiliation religious low as such Orthodox Christianity.the to converted who Muslims former with interviews his after conclusion Pelkmans' in Christians”. were ancestors those Muslims Adjarian most afford “Ajarians and Christians because greatand Christianity respect, respect ancestors a their nowadays, that, argue Walter and Sanikidze 2014. in held be will census Adjara. in place taking groups. social the backrespective to position their renegotiate women Muslim Georgian how show to intend I hypotheses, these verify to addition In Tajfel, Liles, Pelkmans, George Islamic Georgia,” “Islam in Practices and Sanikidze, 12. Pelkmans, in State 8; Nation and Georgia”; “Religion, in -- and Balci Georgia.” “Islam Motika, Post Soviet George IslamicGeorgia,” “Islam in Practices and Sanikidze, 12; Liles, It can be argued that in Georgia the status of the majority religion group is perceived as legally as perceived is group religion majority the of status the Georgia in that argued be can It number limited a only has Muslims) Georgian as (such group, minority a Tajfel, Following is Christianization of process accelerated an that debates academic in consensus a is There Islam Transformation andReligious in Adjara Human Groups Categories andSocial 44 Defending the BorderDefending the In addition to that, conversion to Christianity is also connected to more “earthly” reasons “earthly” more to connected also is Christianity to conversion that, to addition In 42 45 However, there are no official numbers to prove this, as the next national next the as this, prove to numbers official no are there However,

1.3 Keeping Islamic Faith Instead IslamicFaith ofConversion 1.3 Keeping , 89–169. 43 This narrative of going back to one's original roots is also apparent also is roots original one's to back going of narrative This 46 , 317–318. . 11 Islam andReligiousIslam Transformation in Adjara many of , of

CEU eTD Collection 48 47 following: the hypotheses are my Hence group. social given a of reproducers biological and cultural well as boundaries group social own and differences. their identity and retain society general the in pursue respect to try and strategy “accommodation” an employ minority groups such that suggest Turner Tajfel and norms, cultural) (and religious separate its maintain to tries group religious minority this time same the at society,and in group religious minority the of position the affect not does group but positionalso inferior. social legitimate their as be accepting could minority religious Muslim Georgian the that thought, of line Tajfelian the following stated, be can it Hence, Adjara. Islamic in positions its strengthen to Church Orthodox Georgian the for support and pretext gives base legislative existing the words, other In Church. Orthodox Georgian the to treatment preferential gives State the how show to details greater into go will I 3, Chapter In Georgia. of Church Orthodox the and state Georgian the between Agreement Constitutional 2002 the under status special group, ethnic majority of the identity the and idea nation-state the to connected closely historically Georgian only theis not as OrthodoxChurch religion status, minority the of that to superior Tajfel, Suny, 2. 1. As I have discussed in the previous sub-chapter, women are seen as the main protectors of protectors main the as seen are women sub-chapter, previous the in discussed have I As religious majority the to members group minority former the of some of assimilation the As group prevents women from conversion to women Georgian from conversion group prevents Orthodox Christianity. Georgian ofsocial Muslim reproducers biological and cultural main the being of perception The to womenGeorgian from conversion prevents OrthodoxChristianity. boundaries group social Muslim Georgian the of protectors main the being of perception The The Making the Georgian of Nation Human Groups Categories andSocial , 1994. , 355. 12 48

47 but also enjoys also but

CEU eTD Collection 51 50 49 enemy”. potential and brother simultaneously were Islam, with associated often are enemies external Moreover, group. this from missing is identity national of idea the of pillar religious the since nation Georgian the from excluded partially least at are Georgians identity. national distinct their preserving thus religion, and language this preserve to succeeded Georgians enemies, external of invasions repeated despite and culture, Georgian negotiation Georgians groups. respective to Muslims,belonging both asperceived their as and well continuous to leads Others Muslim the Christian and the Georgians between in Muslims Georgian of position the hence boundaries, group of protectors main as perceived are women As groups. respective these to relation in Muslims Georgian situate to the illustrating on concentrated us enable it as Others, Muslim the Georgiansand is Christian the between boundaries group of evolution chapter This Others. Muslim the and Georgians Christian the between Muslims Georgian positioned it Moreover, boundaries. intergroup salient more to led 1990s, later, theunion, and Soviet in secularism ofGeorgian the revival and early 1980s late in the nationalism that argue I is. narrative national Georgian the in Muslims Georgian the of position current the what and times, Soviet during reference of point main their as nationality to religion from switched Adjarians how identity, national Georgian Ibid., 140. 2007): 336–337. Motika, Raoul Post SovietBayram in -- and Balci “Islam Georgia,” University,Future, Maltepe http://goo.gl/OHXKVQ. 2009), Selves of Muslim Georgians” Studies: onCentralPresent Eurasian Past, at Conference theand International (presented Tamta “Georgian and Nutsa Khalvashi Batiashvili, vs.Narrative Identity:and Narratives State Ideology National Elite 50 s mnind erir earlier, mentioned As of stones corner the of one is Christianity Orthodox why detail in explain will chapter This

thus classifying the Muslim Georgians, if not as the Other, then as as then Other, the as not if Georgians, Muslim the classifying thus Chapter 2. The Christian theMuslim and Other Georgian erin lnug n rhdx Crsint r onrtns of cornerstones are Christianity Orthodox and language Georgian the birth of Georgian nationalism in the 19th century, the forced the century, 19th the in nationalism Georgian of birth the 13 51 I will start by mapping the place of Orthodox of place the mapping by start will I Central Survey Asian f ter sl-dniiain as self-identification their of 49 This This “'incomplete selves'; they selves'; “'incomplete 26, no. 3 (September 1, 26,no.3(September implies that Muslim that implies

CEU eTD Collection 55 54 53 a 52 with flag (white Gorgansali Vakhtang King of flag the in used was cross George’s St. preserver: Golden theAge, Georgian life. daily from inseparable secular almost OrthodoxChurch was Georgian.” a considered longer no was Islam adopted and “who intertwined, closely were identities ethnic and religious century, 19th the the in nationalism of era the in than flexible more and Islam of threat the against MuslimGeorgians ofneighboring Iran instead Christianfought with Byzantium themselves identified country the of rulers the ideology: unified a of formation the influenced highly Christianity and Church the language, spoken the standardized Rustaveli, Shota writer, Georgian famous most the whilst argues, he Furthermore, rituals. pagan old the with coexisted Christianity as just together coexisted they as culture, Georgian popular and high between line cutting As literature. Georgian medieval on influence large a had Church the and places, pagan previously in times these during built were monasteries and churches Georgian autocephalous ofthe apogee was during OrthodoxChurch the 4 of beginning the in Christianity to Georgia) eastern (now Iberia of king the convert put Georgian social boundaries religious oftheir identity. negotiation ofconstant a place Muslimsin strong as well as boundaries national strong that showing by conclude will I and Adjara in indicator identity main of shifts discussing by continue then Georgia, of narrative national the in Christianity Smith, Chikovani, andGeorgia: IslamModern “Christianity in 105. andResponses,” Searchfor Experience, Challenges The Suny, Joselian, In addition to this, Georgian Orthodoxy also served as a Georgian Georgian a as served also Orthodoxy Georgian this, to addition In and inclusive more was Golden identity Georgianthe Age during although that, adds Chikovani 4 the to back dates Georgia in Christianity The Making the Georgian of Nation The EthnicOrigins Nations of A History of Georgian Short the Church 2.1 Orthodox Christianity in the National Narrative ofGeorgia the Narrative 2.1 OrthodoxChristianityNational in . , 1994,39. , 24. th 14 century. According to legend, St. Nino managed to managed Nino St. legend, century. to According Suny describes, at that time there was no clear no was there time that at describes, Suny M iddle ages: a ages: iddle ethnie 55 identity builder and builder identity 54 Tosum up, th great numbergreat of century. . 53

in the in 52

The

CEU eTD Collection 61 60 59 58 57 56 culture. ofthe of preservers the national role assigned themselves and Georgia of Age Golden the of heroes the celebrated Church The culture. past of preservation and past the of veneration atheism, and communism rejecting path, conservative a took Church Orthodox Georgia. ethnic in living groups other against Georgians of hegemony the promoted which nationalism narrow a in resulted forchange. considered point a as starting and society, of corruption the from separated was Church GeorgianOrthodox the population, of majority of minds the in that speculates also He republic. Soviet other any in than stronger perhaps was Georgia in he hand, other the On Stalinism. the under oppression extreme through language. the and culture Georgianthe role. a central OrthodoxChurch occupies Georgia, of myth national the in that surprising not is it Hence, well. as Church Orthodox Georgian the thus flag, state Georgian official the became flag Tamar's” “Queen so-called this 2003, in Revolution Rose the after evangelists”. four the and Savior Our of symbol Christian “the symbolize Tamar Queen the including kingdom, 5 the as early as it) on cross red single Ibid., 113. Jones, Georgian “The Church,” Orthodox 115. Communists,” Subcultures SeptemberJohnston, under Nationalist -- 21,1993,249. the “Religio “The of Georgia.” theAdministration President of Dowling, Georgia be considered to ofis thebeginning Golden century the 13th of Georgia.Age Queen Tamar as theGeorgia. most in regarded one historical is figures of important of – reignthe Her 12th the end in In short, in Georgian historiography the notion of the Georgian Orthodox Church is closely is Church Orthodox Georgian the of notion the historiography Georgian in short, In G the that addition, in argues, Jones national the of preserver symbolic a as seen was Church Georgian the times, Soviet the During , chap. 3; Dowling, 3; , chap. Sketches of GeorgianSketches of Church History implying a present continuation of the Golden age with a referral to Queen Tamar and Queen to referral a with age Golden the of continuation present a implying 59 60

Sketches of GeorgianSketches of Church History In the late 1980s, during a lighter regime led by Gorbachev, the G the Gorbachev, by led regime lighter a during 1980s, late the In In the Soviet Union, Johnston argues, the Georgian Orthodox Orthodox Georgian the argues, Johnston Union, Soviet the In th 56 century, and it was used by other monarchs of the Georgian the of monarchs other by used was it and century, ae or mr euae rse ee added were crosses Jerusalem more four Later . . eorgian Orthodox Church's Orthodox eorgian 15 , chap. 14. , chap. 61 Eastmond, Eastmond, states that religious nationalism religious that states 58 isolation under communism under isolation Here it should be noted that noted be should it Here Royal Imagery in Medieval ImageryMedieval in Royal Church went Church 57 which eorgian

CEU eTD Collection 66 65 64 63 62 and domain private the to public the of out language Georgian push to managed language Turkish the century 18th the to 16th the from nobility. continued amongst It conversions the from started that process long a was It Empire. Ottoman Identity Reference the as Main 2.2.1 Islam of Georgian national realm. Georgian leaves outside which Muslims inclusiveness, solidarity and national for basis a religion is that also but consciousness, national and narrative national Georgian of part integral only not is Orthodoxy inclusiveness, and solidarity national for basis a provide elites, nationalistic modern by interpreted and constructed are they ways the and traditions, and memories symbols, myths, century Georgian nineteenth (Christianity).” faith of the homeland, “language, national movement, slogan the by suggested as consciousness national Georgian and narrative national Georgian the in part Georgiantheidentity. of national important a particularly plays “Christianity Sanikidze, words of In the part integral an is Orthodoxy Georgian that stated be could history,it Church with intertwined closely is narrative national Georgian the as and culture Georgian of preserver the as seen is Church the flag), Georgian new nationhood. (the tostate secular connected usedfor the are Church the symbols of the As Cornell, Cornell, Pelkmans, in “Islam Baramidze, Adjara - Comparative Analysis of Two in Communities 98. Adjara,” Anthony D. Smith, George IslamicGeorgia,” “Islam in Practices and Sanikidze, 5. The spread of Islam in this region began in the 16th century when it fell under rule of the of rule under fell it when century 16th the in began region this in Islam of spread The ethnic common As ethnosymbolism. Smith's of prism a through it at look to useful is it Here, 66 ). Together with Islam, there was a spread of the Turkish language as well: in the 19th century, 19th the in the Turkish well: of as ). Togetherspread language a was there Islam, with Small NationsSmall andGreat Powers Defending the BorderDefending the Myths the Nation andMemoriesof 64 or the beginning of the 19th century 19th the of beginning the or , 96. 2.2 Identity Shiftsin 2.2 Identity Adjara , 163. (Oxford University Press, USA, 2000),Introduction. (Oxford chap. 16 65 (others mention the 15th to the 17th the to 15th the mention (others 63 I argue that Georgian that argue I 62

CEU eTD Collection 71 70 69 68 Christian between difference 67 religious the downplaying nationalists Georgian in resulted exodus ofGeorgian oftherejection individual emigrants. accounts in isevident rhetoric national the but well, as account into taken be should factors political and economic that and Adjara, leave to migrants of decision the in ones only the not were factors arguesreligious He that Empire. Ottoman the nation” Georgian the Georgian left of Muslims lot a 1878-1880 in for in welcomed that Adjara overviews Pelkmans – Adjara of orbit the into back brought be to ought which GeorgianChristian community. the to of contribute part as not did themselves Muslims, and perceiving Adjarians Christians juxtaposed which of other the and Adjarians, amongst Islam institutional supervised closely loyal, strengthened communities. Muslim with battles numerous in Adjara, the to dependable made more them and Tsarist Empire. Ottoman neighboring than onthe authorities introduced. time, same the at and state, receive to order in abroad traveling for the restrictions by trained were personnel Muslim century, 19th late the in this, to addition In Muslims. 200 than more with villages the in mosques more building and affairs Muslim managing for institutions two of creation the foresaw which legislation approved Tsar the 1872, In loyalty. their gain as well as Caucasus in Muslims the over control Tsarist establish to tried elites ruling century end ofthe by the Turkish of language public literaryand the both the became Adjara. Ibid., 98. Pelkmans, Muslim Georgians.” Batiashvili,Khalvashi “Georgian and of vs.Narrative NationalElite and Identity: Selves Narratives State Ideology in “Islam Baramidze, Adjara - Comparative Analysis of Two in Communities 99. Adjara,” Pelkmans, Nevertheless, in the eyes of the 19th century nationalists Adjara was seen as “a lost region lost “a as seen was Adjara nationalists century 19th the of eyes the in Nevertheless, in living Christians, used Russia Tsarist borderlands, its secure to order in time, same the At The Empire. Russian the into incorporated was war, Adjara Russian-Turkish the after 1878, In 68 Defending the BorderDefending the BorderDefending the These measures strengthened this restricted institutional framework of Islam in Adjara, in Islam of framework institutional restricted this strengthened measures These , 97. , 96. 17 religious education or to obtain a religious title were title religious a obtain to or education religious 69 No doubt these two policies, one of which of one policies, two these doubt No 70 . But this idea was not was idea this But . 71

67 This

CEU eTD Collection 78 77 76 75 74 73 72 by case, this in and Muslims, by communities Christian all for used name ”The it: put Batiashvili and kin. GeorgianMuslim ethnic Turks their neighboring with the than with more associate to tended Adjarians The Adjara. in identity of determinant main the being as belonging, national not and religion, to contributed Georgianintelligentsia, century 19th the of rhetoric nationalistic the as well as Islam, institutionalized strengthened that policy Tsarist mentioned above the by followed empire, instead. Islam was identification their of core the and nation, ties with closer Turkey, Georgia. and not Georgians, and Russians 1921 -- 1917 of period chaotic to returning emigrants ofthe to a measuresmajority led These following in the twoyears. Adjara positions. administrative higher hold to of Adjarians eligibility ensured also and service, military from of system,the the that population tax in wouldbe nochange there ensured that wouldbe exempt Adjara document the addition, In disputes. heritage and family with dealing when law Sharia using continue allowed and Islam, of inviolability the guaranteed which 1880 in decree a issued started also but rhetoric this exodus. against take Russianauthoritiesupmeasures to the pressuring their changed only not Chavchavadze, the Ilia empire, by Ottoman led the to nationalists, Adjara Georgian from Muslims Georgian of emigration mass the stop to tried narrative. historic mutual of importance the stressing and Adjarians Muslim and Georgians Derluguian, “The Myth ‘Ethnic “The Conflict,’”Derluguian, Hille, 276; of Pelkmans, Hille, Myth ‘Ethnic “The Conflict,’”Derluguian, 276. of Bolsheviks etc. ofThe the end the first of Republic Georgia, of creation WW1, fightsGeorgian between Russian Mensheviks and Ibid. Ibid., 99. Thus it could be stated that prior to the Soviet era, Adjarians did not identify with the Georgian the with identify not did era, Adjarians Soviet the to prior that stated be could it Thus the during especially tense, remained Georgians and Adjarians between relations However, State Building the Caucasus in andConflict Resolution Defending the BorderDefending the 75 and in an 1918 referendum, the majority of Adjarians voted in favor of favor in voted Adjarians of majority the referendum, 1918 an in and , 99. 74 : the Muslims of Adjara assisted Turkish armies, fought against against fought armies, Turkish assisted Adjara of Muslims the : 76

18 State Building andConflictResolution the Caucasus Building in State , 106. 77

The millet system of the Ottoman the of system millet The The Tsarist authorities Tsarist The Muslim courts to courts Muslim 78 As 72 Khalvashi As they As 73 , 106.

both

CEU eTD Collection 80 79 Batumi. of port the in transit free to right a have would Turkey and protectorate Georgian the under autonomy of measure large a have would Adjara that concluded was it time same the at but SSR, Georgian of control under remained border Turkish-Georgian the of north borders and treaty, this Batumi Under signed. was rule, Soviet under arena international the in from2.2.2 Shift --Identification Religiousto Self National Christian the Georgians, Georgian core inofthe the religionwas the as Muslim identity.and Muslims Georgian the between boundary the than weaker is Muslims Georgian the Turks) case and this (in Others Muslim the between boundary the that indicates it – line punctuated the Note below. illustrated are Union Soviet the to prior them between in placed Muslim Georgian perceptionof'Gurjiness'” from them their and estranged rule Russian was Adjarians, Hille, Hille, Muslim Georgians.” Batiashvili,Khalvashi “Georgian and of vs.Narrative NationalElite and Identity: Selves Narratives State Ideology In 1921, the peace treaty of Kars between Turkey and Russia, as the latter represented Georgia represented latter the as Russia, and Turkey between Kars of treaty peace the 1921, In the and Others Muslim the and Georgians Christian the between boundaries group social The State Building the Caucasus in andConflict Resolution giauri meaning non-Muslim and this category was ascribed to Georgians living under living Georgians to ascribed was category this and non-Muslim meaning Figure 1.Georgian Soviet to the Union Muslimsprior 19 , 102. 80 As a result a As 79 , Adjara became one of the of one became , Adjara

CEU eTD Collection 84 83 82 81 givenunit. territorial ofa nationalities formembers oftitular treatments preferential from benefit not could they that obvious is it group, ethnic separate a as exist not did it. As Adjarians in nationality groups USSR. ethnic hundred a almost 1930s late to 1924 the of design ethnoterritorial the fit to reclassified were they because Union Soviet the in “disappeared” from – case unique a not is Union Soviet pre-Turkish aspects oftraditional, preserve many to continued culture. and pre-Soviet Adjarians and rare stayed marriages intergroup that noted, be must it However, differences. cultural their despite Georgians as identify to choosing Adjarians to contributed this of All Adjara. to moving were country the of part eastern the from Georgians secular time, same the At Asia. Central to 1944 in Georgia from removed physically were who Turks Meskhetian alien or Georgians simply becoming between choose to had policies, homogenization national the of because in Adjara, “Azerbaijanis” new the enough, not was ethnicity. that their if of As regardless passports their in became Azerbaijanis later latter the and Muslims; and Georgians Armenians, Caucasus: South the in entities ethnic indigenous religion. their respondentsabout USSR askedthe census official no because Georgians as listed simply were Adjarians the Later 1926. in once, only used was census Soviet the in for Adjarians entity separate The rule. Soviets the of years the during significance its lost gradually it religion, was Adjarians the of identification group different the described which thewas Jewish Autonomous Oblast). other (the grounds ethnic on not and religious, on created Union Soviet the in units autonomous two More on ethnic policies in theexample Soviet in policies for More Roeder, Unionsee onethnic EthnicMobilization.” Federalism “Soviet and Pelkmans, Zürcher, Myth ‘Ethnic “The Conflict,’”Derluguian, 227. of 83 It is ought to be noted that the disappearance of the Adjarian group from the ethnic map of the of map ethnic the from group the Adjarian of disappearance the that noted be to ought is It three just were there knowledge, popular to according WWI, to prior that argues Derluguian factor main the of Adjara Republic the Autonomous of creation the of moment the at Although More importantly, Adjara as a territorial unit continued to exist, despite the lack of a titular a of lack the despite exist, to continued unit territorial a as importantly, Adjara More The Post -- Soviet Wars -- The Post Defending the BorderDefending the , 105. , 201. 20 81

82 84

CEU eTD Collection 89 88 the Communists.” ofCommunism”; “The Religion Soviet -- under “Religio Domestication Subcultures Johnston, Nationalist underDragadze, see: 87 86 85 based was Adjara in Islam easily, underground go to able were which brotherhoods Muslim on based was Islam where Caucasus, North to contrary Third, are. Adjarians the predominantly as Sunni to was opposed as Shiite, which Baku, in directorate spiritual Muslim created newly a of leadership the under fell Muslims Second, Adjarian centers. cultural and religious former their from off cut Adjarians the left Turkey and Union Soviet the between border the of closing the all, of First reasons. several clergy the Muslim by forcing sermons. religious during their support theauthorities Soviet to of and “Union Atheists”, a creating by media, mass using by propaganda atheistic harsh a implemented remained. mosques registered two only 1936, by implemented. eagerly were Adjara sentiments anti-Turkish and anti-Islamic strong of background a from with Georgia. identification their stressing of strategies the employing were party, the up way their worked who the those then, in By 1960s. only ASSR this of elite political entered properly Adjarians and Adjarian, never was 1950s the until Adjara of party Communist the of secretary first the example, For country. the of parts other to earlier, moved from mentioned had as Adjara Georgianswho, non-Muslim of consisted mostly elites political The formation. elite intellectual and institutional local to came it when position disadvantaged Consequently, sphere. away,a domestic pushed in the in Georgian was into were and Arabic; Adjarians More -- onanti religious against policiesapplied Georgian Orthodox Church andits position the Soviet during times Ibid. George Islamic Georgia,” “Islam in Practices and Sanikidze, 13. Ibid., 106. Pelkmans, The Making of the Georgian of The Making Nation The resistance to these measures was weak. According to Pelkmans, it can be attributed to attributed be can it Pelkmans, to According weak. was measures these to resistance The came who Georgians, non-Muslim were elite communist local the of majority the as Therefore, Turkishin conducted mainly in was education Adjara the Union, Soviet the to prior addition, In Defending the BorderDefending the , 105. 85 ; Jones, “Soviet Religious Policy and the Georgian Jones,; Religiousand “Soviet the Policy Orthodox Apostolic Church”;

87 As Sanikidze writes, from 158 mosques in Adjara in early 1920s, early in Adjara in mosques 158 from writes, Sanikidze As 21 88 n adto o ti, te scait authorities socialist the this, to addition In 86 , the anti-Islamic policies in policies anti-Islamic the , 89

CEU eTD Collection 92 91 90 not nation religion. a corresponding and with identifythemselves started Adjarians that shows brackets in religion and boundaries, group weaker indicates line punctuated The Georgians.” as themselves see to allowed Adjarians and identity national Georgian and Orthodoxy Georgian between disconnection partial least at to led sphere public into public, the from “ that moved notes stronger.Pelkmans grew factor national the and Christianity sphere, domestic Orthodox Georgian and Islam both as declined factor centers. cultural and religious former their from off cut completely were Muslims Georgian and closed was Soviet-Turkishborder the addition, In against not and past dark the of relics against struggling as them classify and policies harsher apply to excuse an Bolsheviks gave it grounds, religious on created was religion. localized very a into it turned and villages, remote to control. authorities which publicwereeasyforSoviet institutions on open Pelkmans, Ibid., 108. Pelkmans, To sum up, the anti-religious measures drove Islam further into the domestic sphere even in even sphere domestic the into further Islam drove measures anti-religious the up, sum To Baptized GeorgianBaptized BorderDefending the Figure 2.GeorgianFigure Union Soviet Muslims during the , 5. , 107. This led to a shift in the identity of Adjarians. The religious of The Adjarians. identity the in shift a to led This 22 91

As the Autonomous Republic of Adjara of Republic Autonomous the As 92 nationalities or separate groups per se. per groups separate or nationalities This is shown in the Figure 2 below. 2 Figure the in shown is This 90 the ban on religion in the in religion on ban the

CEU eTD Collection 95 94 93 “this discourse nationalist however, contemporary the with perfectly ideology, in fit has Islam Turk'and 'evil the Soviet of denouncing in framed course of was historiography new This denounced. be to had that history of part the Empire, Ottoman the with intertwined inclosely was historiography Soviet Islam that continues He pressures. economic or persuasion by not and violence, and force plain by Adjara in spread was Islam that was historians Soviet the by held view general the that observes Georgian history, to it history. of Ottoman connect strongly to from it order remove in to Adjara and He history the reinterpreted historians era, Soviet the during Georgia.that independent writes the Pelkmans Georgianness viewed intelligentsia categories. twoincompatible Muslimnessas and Georgia.” within position Ajaria's of denial a as and nation Georgian the on attack “an as Islam of rebirth the saw who not did discourse anti-Muslim the time this and motherland language, – nationalism Georgian the of components main three the forward put who Chavchavadze Ilia activist public and writer century 19th the of followers themselves considered 1990s early and 1980s late the of movement nationalist it. of part integral as religion of notion the had which nationalists century 19th the by used rhetoric the employed 1990s early and 1980s late the surprise no is it hence narrative, national Georgian the with intertwined closely is Orthodoxy Georgian chapter, this of beginning the in demonstrated was it as However, era. of religions2.2.3 Return MuslimOther andthe Muslim Georgians.” Batiashvili,Khalvashi “Georgian and of vs.Narrative NationalElite and Identity: Selves Narratives State Ideology Pelkmans, Chedia, “Georgian Nationalism Today: of Millennium.” the New Facing the Challenges Paradoxically enough, the Soviet historiography contributed to this this to contributed historiography Soviet the enough, Paradoxically Gorbachev the during 1980s the in revival a experienced Christianity Georgian and Islam Both Defending the BorderDefending the 94 hlah n aisvl lo age ta ainlsi htrc o Georgian of rhetoric nationalistic that argue also Batiashvili and Khalvashi , 109. stem from atheist ideology but from Georgian nationalists Georgian from but ideology atheist from stem va askuda ad ohr laes o Georgian of leaders other and Gamsakhurdia Zviad 23 religion. 93 Reborn Islam faced faced Islam Reborn that Georgian nationalists from nationalists Georgian that othering opposition 95 of the Muslims in Muslims the of again. But again.

CEU eTD Collection 99 98 97 96 national boundaries. and withdepicting religious twosolid Figure lines 3illustratesthis following The narrative. national Georgian the of part integral an being from Muslims Georgian prevented rhetoric nationalistic same the in sentiments anti-Islamic the that, to addition In Others. Muslim the as Turks demonized narrative national Georgian the as Turks and Georgians between boundaries group national identify not did Adjarians because problematic is Georgians as themselves priorSoviet to the Union. Christians) as alone (let view this above, written was it as However, Muslim. been really never have and well, as Christians as thus, subconsciously, Georgians, as themselves only perceived if even always, have Adjarians myth, the to According continuity. Georgian Christian- undisrupted the on based is 1980s, the since intelligentsia Georgian the as well as clergy Christianity. Orthodox of prism the through but historiography Soviet mentioned above the of continuation a as viewed be should of Adjara past Ottoman the of omission this And 1878. to prior past Adjara's of centuries three history, presentsGeorgiathat powers.” Islamic island a as Christian bythreatening surrounded Ibid. Pelkmans, revisionism theMore pastpost in world: soviet of onthe -- Pelkmans, In conclusion, the fall of the Soviet Union and the rise of Georgian nationalism strengthened the strengthened Georgiannationalism of rise the and Union Soviet the of fall the conclusion, In of revisionism the escape not did countries, post-soviet other as Georgia, 1990s, the In 97 however, as Pelkmans points out, it affected not only the Communist past, but also additional also but past, Communist the only not affected it out, points Pelkmans as however, Defending the BorderDefending the BorderDefending the 98 As Pelkmans continues, the myth, propagated by the Georgian Orthodox Georgian the by propagated myth, the continues, Pelkmans As Figure 3. , 95. , 108. Georgian Union MuslimsafterSoviet the 24 Verdery, The Political Lives of Dead BodiesThe Political Dead Lives of 96

. 99

CEU eTD Collection 101 100 themmarry Muslims. to allows their only Islam as reproducers, defend cultural and biological as to act they and hijab, have a were they when they nationality narrative, historical Orthodox Georgian dominant the against religion their defend to have they preservation: and maintenance boundary group to connected directly more Georgianthan Orthodoxy. religion backwards more as Islam see Muslims Georgian the of some as future the of ideas the to and relations, Muslim and Christian Georgian discussing are outsiders the when positions identity chose to guest a or host a of role the performing with connected is it when especially roles, social performing in tensions the to in connected are Adjara, and GeorgianMuslimaffiliations difficulties – – Georgian combiningboth amongmain menin Muslim distinct of negotiation constant a to leads undoubtedly the Others as alienation complete the and nation Georgian the in membership complete between Muslims Georgian of position This imagery. national the in Orthodoxy Georgian with intertwined closely is it ofGeorgian andofimportance the increase reference identity. as isnot thissecular national identity But Pelkmans, Georgianinherent of a part social culture. A Georgian involvesand led that bya is feast toastmaster. cuisine traditional and of is the tradition toasting Supra an However, as my research showed, Georgian Muslim women face different challenges which are which challenges different face women Muslim Georgian showed, research However, my as identity main the as Islam of importance of decline the experienced have up, Adjarians To sum Defending the BorderDefending the 101

, 125–133. in a a in supra 25 100 and consuming alcohol and pork, to being forced being to pork, and alcohol consuming and identifications. Pelkmans argues that that argues Pelkmans identifications. the

CEU eTD Collection 103 102 assimilate. onminorityMuslimsto puts pressure the of before, chapter the positioning in shown as Georgians, the of the imaginary national the of outside with Islam of followers together Church, Orthodox Georgian the of expansion ongoing This religions. minority to compared treatment preferential it gives which legislation national existing to due Islam than positions stronger has also Church Orthodox Georgian The schools. public in history curriculum the through and institutions, educational Christian through built, being are which churches to womenGeorgian from conversion prevents OrthodoxChristianity. group social Muslim Georgian of reproducers biological and cultural main the being of perception the 2) and Christianity; Orthodox Georgian to conversion from women prevents boundaries group social t 1) that hypotheses of set second my to background a as serve to meant is chapter This region. this in Islam of time presence same the weakens the at and Adjara in influence this its expand legitimizes to Church that the enables framework and position institutional privileged present and Adjara, in Church Orthodox Georgian was seen as a symbolic preserver of the national culture and the the and culture national the of preserver symbolic a as seen was sphere. private the into public Johnston, “Religio -- Nationalist Subcultures under the Communists,” Subcultures SeptemberJohnston, under Nationalist -- 21,1993,249. the “Religio Soviet under DomesticationCommunism,” of 141. “The Dragadze, Religion In a nutshell, I argue that the that argue I nutshell, a In the of position privileged the to led that reasons the of overview an provide I chapter, this In During the soviet times, both Georgian Orthodoxy and Islam experienced a shift from the from shift a experienced Islam and Orthodoxy Georgian both times, soviet the During Chapter Orthodox Church 3.Georgian in Adjara 3.1 Religious Revival in Georgia in Revival 3.1 Religious and Adjara 102 However, they performed different roles, as only the GeorgianChurch the only as However,differentroles, performed they he perception of being the main protectors of the Georgian Muslim Georgian the of protectors main the being of perception he expansion of Orthodox Christianity is executed through new through executed is Christianity Orthodox of expansion 26 language. 103 Hence, Hence, in the late 1980s, late the in

CEU eTD Collection 109 108 Other 107 patterns. occupational 106 and educational their 105 to as 104 well as centers, urban to proximity geographic to due society Georgian the into integrated tightly became Adjarians the Adjara, Lower later spreading further and further into the highlands. Nowadays, the border between Islamic and Islamic between border the Nowadays, highlands. the into further and further spreading later and towns, coastal other and Batumi capital regional the in first churches, opening by activity of scope its increased Church Orthodox Georgian the as 1990s the throughout in Adjara weaker grew gradually sides. taking start to had religious deeply not meant identity social of aspects other close and religion between connection This sphere. public the in power institutional more received Church Orthodox Georgian the from GeorgianGeorgian inseparable regarded Orthodoxy, as nationality 1980s late the in started which increased. people educated religiously and Islam of followers of numbers and constructed, newly or rehabilitated were institutions educational religious and worship ofGeorgia lines” ethnic and historic “geographic, the along interests Church Orthodox Georgian the defend to was 1980s, culture. national Age Golden the of heroes the anti-Western an The stance. and culture, past of preservation past, the of veneration G the rural Upper Adjara. and Lower urban of borders geographical the to correspond less or more influence of zones Christian Ibid., 55; Liles, Ibid., 55; Pelkmans, in “Islam Baramidze, Adjara - Comparative Analysis of Two in Communities 102. Adjara,” State the Georgian on the Current Lilienfeld, of “Reflections 226. and Nation,” Church Jones, Georgian “The Church,” Orthodox 113. Suny, eorgian Orthodox Church Orthodox eorgian Actually, differences between religiosity in Lower and Upper Adjara date to the Soviet era. In era. Soviet the to date Adjara Upper and Lower in religiosity between differences Actually, Islam experienced a notable revival which started in the Gorbachev era as well. Places of Places well. as era Gorbachev the in started which revival notable a experienced Islam The Making the Georgian of Nation Defending the BorderDefending the Islam Transformation andReligious in Adjara 105 Moreover, one of the main concerns at the time of the nationalist movement in the in movement nationalist the of time the at concerns main the of one Moreover, 109 106 . , 53. 104 took a conservative path with rejection of communism and atheism, and communism of rejection with path conservative a took of Georgia, and assigned themselves a role of preservers of the of preservers of role a themselves assigned and Georgia, of , 1988,38–39. 108 Pelkmans argues that the Islamic revival of the 1980s the of revival Islamic the that argues Pelkmans 27 , 1. 107 However, as the nationalist movement nationalist the However, as that even individuals who were who individuals even that Church celebrated Church

CEU eTD Collection 114 113 112 111 110 the protested and Georgians, from in Georgia. ultra-nationalistturn and chauvinist differences their reasserted Adjarians the party, Communist prevailed. communists the here – in Adjara not proper,but Georgia in elections the in InNovember 1990, Adjara. supported well not was Georgians” Christian for “Georgia into translated be could which Georgians”, Christianity. Orthodox ethnically as Georgia of future the imagined and rhetoric, theocratic a used Gamsakhurdia, Zviad nationalist Georgia, independent of president first The Adjara. in influence it's and Christianity Orthodox of rise the for account partially least at could Georgia independent of years growth”. its supported have could who Ajaria of holders power political and economic the to links lacked also it clergy.Moreover, educated an and resources financial lacked it because handicapped severely “was revival this with But Islam. and reactivate to 1980s, networks the local allowed in religion, on Hence, rhetoric softer domain. Gorbachev's public the from banned being despite times, Soviet the with Christianity”. be identified to came later in outlook, atheistic although which, life-styles, Soviet-Georgian of adoption gradual a to “added Georgia of parts other from people of immigration as well as Georgians, non-muslim with intermarriage as such processes, demographic Zürcher, Toft, Ibid., 53. Ibid. Pelkmans, The interplay between local (Adjarian) and Georgian authorities and both religions in the first the in religions both and authorities Georgian and (Adjarian) local between interplay The Simultaneously, Upper in life domestic of part important be an toduring Adjara continued Islam The Geography of Ethnic Violence of The Geography 111 The Post -- Soviet Wars -- The Post Defending the BorderDefending the 112

3.2 Local and State State and 3.2 Local 1990s and Religionin Authorities Although his party won the elections in Georgia, his rhetoric “Georgia for “Georgia rhetoric his Georgia, in elections the won party his Although Gamsakhurdia's Gamsakhurdia's , 113. , 202. , 110. Round Table-Free Georgia 114 28 oee, ti eeto f wa ol e called be could what of rejection this However, coalition won the majority in the won majority coalition 110 pure, with close links to links close with pure, 113

By voting for the for voting By

CEU eTD Collection 120 119 118 117 116 115 from and taxes certain from officials Church the exempted Georgia; of history the in Church Orthodox the called agreement, This signed. was State ofGeorgiaOrthodox Church history inofGeorgia the state”. from the its independence and the Apostle of Autocephalous role special the recognize shall as well as religion, and belief of freedom in Islam Adjara. and Christianity between influence and power of distribution unequal an to contributed undoubtedly affairs. community on Islamic than Church the of affairs the on coverage more considerably gave regime, the with affiliated closely family, Muslim influential Adjarian and noble a Church. Orthodox Muslims, local but also ofGeorgiansfrom from not ofthe supporters Georgian weremajor who Adjara, not was and time, same of Adjara. status autonomic the revoke to intention Gamsakhurdia's against protests their during Muslims rural local of support the with power to came 1992-2004, from ruled Adjara who authorities. Aslan Abashidze, local by Islam of treatment preferential to lead not did Adjara, in nationalism Christian Orthodox Georgian The Constitution Georgia of Pelkmans, Marten, Pelkmans, Ibid., 280. Myth ‘Ethnic “The Conflict,’”Derluguian, 282. of In 2002, an additional constitutional agreement between the Georgian Orthodox Church and the and Church Orthodox Georgian the between agreement constitutional additional an 2002, In T authorities local and state both by Church Orthodox Georgian the of favoritism this up, To sum he Constitution of Georgia, adopted in 1995, states that “[t]he state shall declare complete declare shall state “[t]he that states 1995, in adopted Georgia, of Constitution he Warlords Defending the BorderDefending the BorderDefending the 115 , 70. 117 However, Abashidze was proclaiming both identities, Georgian and Adjarian, at the at and Adjarian, Georgian identities, both proclaiming However, was Abashidze In fact, it seems that the regime of Abashidze, who himself was a descendant from descendant a of was regime himself the who that Abashidze, seems it fact, In revealing his own religious affiliation at all, at affiliation religious own his revealing , para.9. 119 , 54. , 54.

3.3 Existing Legal Framework Legal Existing Concordat 118 tended to favor Christian Orthodoxy, as local media, Orthodoxy,local Christian as favor to tended 29 , recognized the special role of the Georgian the of role special the recognized , 116 as he relied on support not only not support on relied he as 120

CEU eTD Collection 125 124 123 122 121 Georgian isgiven. Muslim OrthodoxChurch andcommunity the Minorities Ethnic Groupof Monitoring tablesadapted the below, In Church. Georgian the of position privileged the ensured practices, legal other as well as Agreement, Constitutional the and Constitution the However, level. state the on as entities law functioning public them of both Islam: and Orthodox Georgian the of organizations the of status legal law. ofprivate entities legal –noncommercial foundations GOC. the as status legal same the is, that – law public of entities legal as register can states”, member Europe of in Council laws by religion a as defined are or Georgia, with ties historical “close have that denominations and groups religious which to according Code, Civil the to amendments adopted Church, Orthodox Georgian the from objections despite Georgia, of parliament the 2011 In groups. religious minority year,another Baku. in based Muslims of Board Caucasus the to subordinate were Georgia of Muslims 2011. May in state the of assistance with created was that (AGM) Muslims Georgian curriculum. school public the regarding cooperation State -- Church the for grounds provided Concordat the Moreover, era. Soviet the during property of losses the for compensation promised and military, the in serving A the Report ontheof State Georgia Muslim Communityin Azerbaijani International Freedom Religious for 2012 Report “Georgia of ontheReligious Status Adopts a Law Organizations.” New Liles, Sap’at’riarkos“Sakartvelos Opicialuri Veb-Gverdi (Official Web-Page of of Georgia).” the Patriarchate The creation of the AGM, and the 2011 amendments to the Civil Code, resulted in an equal an in resulted Code, Civil the to amendments 2011 the and AGM, the of creation The of the Administration by represented is level highest the on Georgia of community Muslim The Islam Transformation andReligious in Adjara important important 124 rmarpr nAebiaiMsi omnt nGogab by Georgia in community Muslim Azerbaijani on report a from 121 123

ni 01 l eiiu ioiyisiuin ol nyrgse sas register only could institutions minority religious all 2011, Until legal development took place: the change of legal status of the AGM and other and the AGM of status legal of change the place: took development 125 , a brief overview of the institutional inequalities between the between inequalities institutional the of overview brief a . , 20. 30 . Before that, that, Before Human Rights Human 122 In the same the In unions or unions the

CEU eTD Collection institutions of education. The state recognizes only the wedding ceremonies that were were that ceremonies wedding the only recognizes state education. The of institutions Georgian Christian or the secular by issued and education confirming documents state recognize mutually Church the Orthodox Moreover, issues. educational on especially government, the consult to right the has Church Orthodox Georgian the Only Administration. Muslim Georgian of leaders the to not but Church, Orthodox Georgian the of head the to immunity legal guarantees state Muslims. The Georgian as such minorities, religious the and state the between relationship the define would which document no is there however institutions, these between relationship the defines Church Orthodox Georgian the and state the between Concordat The state. the by Muslims Georgian the and Church As can be seen from Table 1, there exists an unequal treatment of the Georgian Orthodox Georgian the of treatment unequal an exists there 1, Table from seen be can As by relevant institutions of of institutions education relevant by issued education Church confirming the documents recognize and mutually state The a and prisons that units military in ensures established is unit religious state The exempted service military from the are recognizes Ecclesiastics the Church state by conducted marriages The issues educational in the especially government, in role consultative a has legal Church The ensures the Patriarch for immunity state The defines Church the Concordate and state the between relations The Church Georgian Orthodox inequalities Non-material Table inequalities 1.Non-material institutional ulm d nt ae any have not ingovernment role consultative do Muslims Georgian Muslims There is no standardized standardized no of education religious Muslim recognition is institutional There Muslim clerics are not exempted exempted not are clerics Muslim as recognize ceremony not marriage official wedding does Muslim state The Muslim Georgian Administration the of leaders the for immunity legal no is There Muslim Administration Georgian the and state the between signed document such no is There The state does not regulate regulate not prisons units and military units in does religious Islamic of establishments state The service military from the 31 conducted by the by conducted

CEU eTD Collection Church has a separate line in the state budget and is exempted from all all from exempted is and budget state the in line separate a has Church the Church, Orthodox Georgian the by run and founded are which institutions educational funds state in and units military in prisons. established unit religious Orthodox Georgian a is there that ensures state and the Georgian service exemptedfrom military are Orthodox Church. Inadditiontoecclesiastics that, Table 2 illustrates the material inequalities in the treatment of religious groups in Georgia. The Georgia. in groups religious of treatment the in inequalities material the illustrates Table2 omt t te partial the to compensations commits and the Union Soviet the during recognizes Church the of losses material state The the authorities ofthese states Church of artifactsforeignstates, with inthatare and the ruins negotiating buildings, of to protection commits It itself Georgia. ruins inside historical their as as repositorywell and buildings Church the protects state The alltaxes from exempted is Church The itemin the state budget separatelinea has Church The the Church religious by ran institutions supportseducational state The Materialinequalities Table 2.Materialinequalities institutional pay profitpay thesalereligiousoftaxon they is taxes: from excluded Associationpartially Muslim Georgian budget state the in line separate a have not does Association for Muslim Georgian institutions Muslim religious minorities theeducation to stateassistancethefrom no is There theSoviet rule to under commit community religious Muslim not does compensatethe material losses ofthe state The areprotected aon regular basis MuslimThe buildings repository and and painting restoration, ofreligious buildings. construction, the to activities related all on products, taxes and religious of importation or provision the on VAT products, 32 taxes. In addition, the state is state the addition, In taxes.

CEU eTD Collection 128 127 126 empire. Ottoman with ofthe the Islam rule associates of part primordial a as Christianity presents curriculum school t that suggests that education (madrassahs). schools private religious and GOC, Islamic the with affiliated and by administered institutions educational schools, public state-run Adjara: Upper in institutions educational of types various are There Adjara. in competing activities. clergy extracurricular time,externalinstructors, student ordirect attend same regularly cannot included, the At it. control to allowed teachers its nor school, the neither and hours, school after only place take 2011. religious since register institution a as to are allowed they as improved has status institutional legal their that noted be must it although position, minority weaker a in are Muslims Georgian time, same the At Georgia. in religion state official no is there that states Georgia of Constitution the that fact the despite base, legal existing the by ensured position privileged forit. partial compensation to committed has and times soviet during Church the of losses material the recognizes state the Also countries. foreign in only not Church the of repository the and buildings the protect to committed Ibid., 15. Liles, International Freedom Religious for 2012 Report In addition, i addition, In are Islam and Christianity Georgianthe Orthodox where fields However, the of one is education can education Religious Georgia. in education religious and secular separates officially law The a enjoys Church Orthodox Georgian the Georgia, contemporary in nutshell, a in it put To Islam Transformation andReligious in Adjara 126

n 1991, the state transferred the jurisdiction of Khulo Khulo of jurisdiction the transferred state the 1991, n he public schools should not take part in religious education, the state the education, religious in part take not should schools public he 3.4 Educational Institutions 3.4 Educational 127 , 3. ept h bv etoe euain o religious on regulation mentioned above the Despite , 11. 33 128

Adjara's history, and at the same time, same the at and history, Adjara's internati

Georgia, but also in also but Georgia, (boarding school) to school) (boarding

CEU eTD Collection 133 132 131 130 129 on usually crosses and churches – symbols religious by dominated heavily is Georgia in space public there intertwined, closely are Orthodoxy Georgian and identity national Georgian nation”. the to people connect that linchpins the are they nation: the of distillations packaged even in Muslim this dominates sphere sphere,OrthodoxChristianity the educational in State Adjara. well. as studentsschools must public attend the ofaall substitutionary schooling: not funding. foreign without madrassahs the support cannot and themselves, funding state lack counterparts Georgian their as role, important the mostTurkish these, the Of NGOs. play and charities Islamic by funded are which Adjara. Upper the in 60 and Lower, the in 12 Adjara, in madrassahs working 72 currently madrassahs funded privately Adjara: beliefs”. Christian <...> theall teaches school “above and university the of administration the in prominent are priests Orthodox Christian: Orthodox undoubtedly of orientation the however, religion, their of regardless students accept institutions from Adjara. students for lodging free and Khichauri schooling free offering district, Shuakhevi in in village opened was university Abuseridze Tbel 2009, in and Church Orthodox Georgian the Fox and Miller -- Idriss, “Everyday Nationhood,” 545. Fox Miller-- “Everyday Nationhood,” and Idriss, Liles, Baramidze, Ibid., 12–13. Ibid., 12. As Fox and Idriss argue, “national symbols – flags, anthems, statues and landmarks – are neatly are – landmarks and statues anthems, flags, – symbols argue,“national Idriss and Fox As the and Church the of separation declared officially the despite that clear is it up, it Summing in education of sphere the in hegemony full have not does Church Orthodox Georgian the But Islam Transformation andReligious in Adjara The Muslim Community of GeorgiaThe Muslim Communityof (Years Politics andState 1991-2012) 132 Nevertheless, due to legal reasons, the status of madrassahs is of an additional, and additional, an of is madrassahs of status the reasons, legal to due Nevertheless, 3.5 Religion in Public Space in Public 3.5 Religion

xs n daa a el Acrig t aaiz, tee are there Baramidze, to According well. as Adjara in exist , 17. 34 130 , 20–25. these institutions is institutions these is no wonder that wonder no is 131 133 129 All of All As the As Both

CEU eTD Collection 140 139 138 137 136 135 134 space. public byoccupying minority religions andover itsother hegemony Adjara churches new stand empty. them Friday prayers,while comes who in during everyone fit physically cannot they and enough, not is leaders, Muslim local to according consideration, into this Adjara. in operating mosques 158 were there when 1921, in period Soviet the of in houses prayer Muslim Adjara, 185 are there 2014 in that estimated is It Christian the reflect ofGeorgianessence land. and visibility public and landscape monopolize churches Orthodox Georgian as territory. Georgia labeling and identity, religious and national between link the of redefinition ofthe populationisMuslim. majority where the villages those in only opened are mosques but parishioners, no are where there even built being are faith”. “true their to return to Georgians Muslim encourage to are conversions, into entrance the mass only than rather churches, new These general. in not Christendom into entrance territory,the Georgian but symbolize to meant are churches region, border this In well. as Union timein history. any other to compared built churches more were there years, twenty last the in as Ages, Middle the since campaign building church- largest the undergoing now is Georgia out, points Manning hill. As a or mountain a of top the Mufti ofMufti of the district Khulo Aslan personal 2nd,2014 May communication Abashidze, in “Islam Baramidze, Adjara - Comparative Analysis of Two in Communities 4. Adjara,” Baramidze, Ibid., 2. Ibid., 3. Georgia,” in NationalSerrano, “De-Secularizing Space 2. andManning, Cosmology,” “Materiality 327. Hence, it can be noted that the Georgian Orthodox Church seeks to establish its presence in presence its establish to seeks Church Orthodox Georgian the that noted be can it Hence, However, the 1980s. since ornewly established werealso prayerreopened manyhouses Muslim strategical a of result a is space public in orthodoxy of spread this that argues Serrano Soviet the of fall in the built since been Adjara have churches Orthodox Georgian new Fourteen The Muslim Community of GeorgiaThe Muslim Communityof (Years Politics andState 1991-2012) 137

134 136

35 138 , 20–25. more more 135 In addition, churches addition, In 139 than at the beginning the at than Even while taking while Even 140

CEU eTD Collection 148 147 146 145 144 143 142 141 populationin Muslim 4to 36percent. byanywhereAdjara from fell percent. 63.9 was Church Orthodox Georgian the of followers the of percentage the time, same the At Muslims. as estimates that time totalpopulationof consistedofthe 34-42percent Adjarians Adjara. of Adjara; population overall the of percent 67 the around at 1989 in Muslims Georgian of size the estimated Tarkhan-Mouravi example, for lot: a vary numbers These estimates. just are Union Soviet the of fall the after numbers population their 1980s, late the in Adjara Adjara. in place taking is Christianization to conversion permanent” more but slower “a to Christianity. leads trend This movement. nationalist the to response symbolic or opportunistic an as viewed be can which baptisms, mass these than Adjara in well. as Adjara Upper in but Adjara, Lower in only day”. not happening single were Pelkmans, a to according in baptisms, Batumi in baptized been had people “5000 that and opened being were churches new that reported media Local 1980s. late the in started Christianity to conversions More exact numbers will be available after the second national census of Georgia national census after the second available willMore be numbers exact 2014. be in conducted will Ibid., 133. Toft, Zürcher, Pelkmans, in State 8; Nation and Georgia”; “Religion, in -- and Balci Georgia.” “Islam Motika, Post Soviet George IslamicGeorgia,” “Islam in Practices and Sanikidze, 12; Liles, Pelkmans, Ibid. Pelkmans, 142 However, according to him, there is a more important conversion trend that started in the 1990s the in started that trend conversion important more a is there However, him, to according The official 2002 census showed that 30.6 percent of Adjara population identified themselves identified population Adjara of percent 30.6 that showed census 2002 official The of process a that debates academic in consensus a is there before, mentioned was it As Mass Adjara. Lower in baptized was population the of part significant a 1990s, the In The Geography of Ethnic Violence of The Geography The Post -- Soviet Wars -- The Post 143 Baptized GeorgianBaptized BorderDefending the 147

Hence, in the first decade after the fall of the Soviet Union, the percentage of Georgian of percentage the Union, Soviet the of fall the after decade first the in Hence, , 4. , 142. , 201. 3.6 Conversions to3.6 Conversions Christianity , 109. 144

As there were no Georgian Muslims officially left in left officially Muslims Georgian no were there As 36 Islam andReligiousIslam Transformation in Adjara

148 145 146 Toft at the same the Toft at

141 population of population These mass These ,

CEU eTD Collection 153 152 151 150 149 successful in become society.to accommodation, situation, time, same the at but boundaries, this group social and values group distinct of their preserve to assimilation, out way another choose to tend women assimilation. is group, minority a of member a being of situation inferior an of out way easiest the Tajfel argues, as And position. minority inferior an in Muslims Georgian puts Georgia, of sphere public the in also and educational sphere, help will ofits get“backwardness”. Adjara rid to associate They of expansion the Union. that hope and Tbilisi, Soviet in especially life, urban the with Orthodoxy Georgian of collapse the by undermined was status middle-class whose people those to modernity of meaning connections. a has nationality Georgian historical and Christianity Orthodox Christian-Georgian addition, making by identity true and religion native their their identification. religious over identification national their chose to tend Muslims Georgian and Georgia, with Adjara of association by facilitated is process conversion the that argues He population. of part mobile socially more a younger, the and class middle from come mostly converts new and villages, isolated more to back retreating is Islam Upper where into Adjara, expanding also is it writes, Liles Adjara. As Ibid., 335. Tajfel, Ibid., 28. Pelkmans, Liles, This is not surprising, as the dominance of the Georgian Orthodox Church in the legislative the in Church Orthodox Georgian the of dominance the as surprising, not is This to – roots their to returning a be to conversion their consider Christianity to converts new The in primacy its established already has Church Georgian the above, mentioned have I As Islam Transformation andReligious in Adjara Human Groups Categories andSocial Baptized GeorgianBaptized , 27. 149 152 However, data I collected showed that part of Georgian Muslim Georgian of part that showed collected I data However, , 331. , 8. 151 37

153 n r o resist to try and cultural and ethnic and cultural Christianity Lower 150 In

CEU eTD Collection themselves from the Georgian from themselves same at time. nation the distancing avoiding while Islam of continuation cultural and biological ensure and boundaries strengthen group to trying by strategy accommodation for opt and process assimilation Muslim the Georgian resist some women showed, research my as But Muslims. minority on assimilate to pressure factors these of All villages. secluded more in prevailing is Islam while well, as Adjara Upper Lower in in hegemony expanding a is has and Georgianalready Adjara Orthodoxy churches. of amount considerable opening and education public using by Adjara Islamic former in influence its expand to Church the allows treatment preferential authorities. state This the by Georgian Church the Orthodox of treatment preferential institutionalized an to led chapter, previous the in presented identity, national In this chapter, I showed how the intertwining of the Georgian Orthodox Church and Georgian and Church Orthodox Georgian the of intertwining the how showed I chapter, this In 38 puts a puts

CEU eTD Collection 154 discuss as settings preferred. deep as in Iwouldhave informal relatedissues and nationality religion to me allow not did barrier language that, to addition In conversation. a in person third the of presence the of because me from experience personal their and information withheld interviewees the of some that suspect I and wanted have the would I translator, as of intimate as help not were a dynamics interpersonal with conducted were interviews majority as all, of First research. this of Islamic religious the of one of in Khulodistrict. in village a small leaders community family a with stay my during gathered data the by supplemented RDQA. application software analysis data qualitative topics. onpreexisting themes than three rather these on based be will analysis my Hence regulations. in-group different nationality, and another prescribing by on nation Georgian from exclusion grounds, religious on nation Georgian from exclusion topics: predetermined these crosses and Muslim Georgian a being of difficulties encompass that themes broad life, three are there that their revealed analysis detailed more a in However,Christianity. to Islam from conversion experienced and have Georgianness participants that and difficulties Muslimness religion-related everyday traditions, topics: preserving main broad three around structured were they and English and Russian Georgian, in interviews sixteen conducted I total, In Adjara. upper in Khulo of district the and lower Adjara in Batumi of city the – Adjara in 2014 in April-May conducted http://rqda.r --http://rqda.r forge.r project.org/ -- Data based HUANG, Ronggui.-- RQDA: R Qualitative (2014). 0.2-- packageAnalysis. R version 6.URL As a foreign researcher, I have encountered a couple of issues that account for some limitations some for account that issues of couple a encountered have researcher,I foreign a As a with processed were they Later transcribed. and English to translated were interviews The observation participant from data and interviews on based is thesis this of part empirical The . Chapter 4.Research Description 39 154 The content analysis of the interviews is interviews the of analysis content The

CEU eTD Collection 155 results. interpreting the while in my mind sample among students of proportions high the keep I course, Of gathered. have I that interviews the of all analyzed I but expected, have I that Batumi in students more to me lead method sampling snowball The Batumi. in intern an is participant one Khulo, of center district then in hospital a in nurse a is participant one Khulo, of center district the in school religious a in work participants two wifes, house are participants three Khulo, of center district the in school public a in teachers are participants two Batumi, in study participants the of Six Georgia. of parts different in lived have or live families their if even Adjara, disasters. ecological of because or resettlement forced by Adjara lower to moved families their of generations previous when there, from descended are or districts) Shuakhevi and Keda (Khulo, upper Adjara from but numbers. byinterview names, their by not referred be will they reason, this For confidential. names their keep but information background conclusions. offinal the depth jeopardizes still period research short such Nevertheless, possible. as it in role women and Islam about possible as much as learn to willingness and Islam to openness my demonstrating by and home at and places public in both scarf head wearing by madrassa, Khulo in as well as school village a in English teach to volunteering by community the into accepted got I life. village and family a in participated actively Ruslan Baramidze, personal communication. February23, 2014. communication. personal Baramidze, Ruslan INT1. A butlives in now in Khuloregion, from village a old small housewife,originally 38year Tot with, start their of some provide participants, interview of overview brief a give I section this In and days ten for Khulo in stayed I – outsider an being mainly, – limitation another Tocounter 155

As I will describe in details later, all of the participants except one, are connected to upper to connected are one, except participants the of later,all details in describe will I As he majority of those who identify themselves as Georgian Muslim are themselves Georgian are as Muslim themselves identify who those of majority he 4.1 Interview Participants4.1 Interview 40

CEU eTD Collection 156 personal free a is choice. Georgian recorded was in interview The to Russian. with translation religion and enough strong is faith her that thinks she as Christianity to convert to planned never she Nevertheless, conversations. such during Georgianness her defend to had and university.the in classes during history identification a called alsowas Turk She religion of her because religious her defend to had and either hijab wearing not is She them. of oldest the is she and siblings Akhalkalaki in lives in Georgian recorded was interview Russian. translation to with of friends. circle The her in important is not religion that andsins, stated biggest of the is one it because Christianity to converting of thought never she However, Muslim. a be her as student bright a such can how surprised was lecturer a once and hijab a wearing while others by Turk a called been has She Muslims. be not can Georgians that think can people uneducated only that opinion of her is and about religion loudly speaks always She yet. it for ready not feels she because everyday hijab wearing not is She region. Khulo in village small a in lives still family her and siblings three of oldest the is She in Georgianrecorded translation. with English was interview The Adjara. in minority Muslim surrounding issues general more about talking started who husband her by interrupted was her with interview The converts. of lot a knows she that fact the despite Christianity to converting of thought never She Georgian. Muslim being comfortable feels she thus mixed, be never should they and categories different two are nationality and religion that stance a taking was and everyday hijab Her wears community. She their in leaders generations. religious the of one 4 is husband least at for Muslim been has family Her sons. two has married, is She Batumi. A townin of Samtskhe-Javakheti region adjacent INT4. A 19 year old student in one of the higher educational institutions in Batumi. She studies She Batumi. in institutions educational higher the of one in student old INT4. year A 19 family Her Batumi. in institutions educational higher the of one in student old year INT3. A20 Batumi. in institutions educational higher the of one in INT2. studies who student A old year 23 156 now and moved there from Khulo for economical reasons. She has three more three has She reasons. economical for Khulo from there moved and now 41

CEU eTD Collection circles knows that she is a Muslim as she is not wearing hijab all the time. But if people ask her about her ask people if But time. the all hijab wearing not is she as Muslim a is she that knows circles social her in everyone Not district. Khulo in village small a in parents her with together live siblings to Russian. translation Georgian with in recorded was interview children. her The to on it pass to plans she and religion family her is this as Christianity to converting of thought never she this despite minority.However, in is she when especially her, for hard is this and majority the from insults verbal from Islam defend to needs she when situations in herself finds she time same the at but religions all respect to tries She is Muslim. population of majority the where district Khulo in example for Muslims, more by surrounded is she when live to easier is it and Georgia in minority religious a be to hard is it that thinks She siblings. three of youngest the is she and Khulo in lives family Her there. institutions educational higher the of in Georgian recorded was interview Russian. translation to with The nationality. with confused be not should and choice personal free a is religion opinion, her In Muslim. a she being die to plans she But and religion this country. in raised and born was she because Muslim remains Christian as perceived is Georgia because and holidays Christian the of one on born because was she to to pressure Christianity convert as peer felt long Shehas for as remembers. she Muslim been has family her and brother younger one has center.She district Khulo the from is family to translation Russian. with Georgian in recorded was interview The reasons. these of to because converting Christianity of thought never She her. for religion best the is it that and her for important very is Islam that feels times same the at but celebrations and rituals religious to only hijab wears she students, other As Georgia. of discourse historical in portrayed Islam is how interested is she because history INT7. A 18 year old student in one of the higher educational institutions in Batumi. Her three Her Batumi. in institutions educational higher the of one in student old year 18 A INT7. one in studies after Batumi in internship her INT6. doing currently is Awho woman old year 20 her but Batumi, in institutions educational higher the of one in student a and 20 is She INT5. 42

CEU eTD Collection Muslim when she knows the history of the region. Apart from that, she has no problems feeling problems no has 157 she that, from Apart region. the of history the knows she when Muslim is she why about others by questioned often gets she However, conversations. their during religion of topic the avoid just they that says she and Christian is friend best Her important. more is religion intrinsic that thinks and ceremonies religious attends or prays she when only hijab wears However,she Muslim. is family her all and children two has She there. NGOs the of one in works also she time same English. recorded was in interview The thing. fashion a of more is in Adjara Christianity and her for religion real a is it Muslim that feels being she because up give to planning not is she But holidays. celebrating stopped she and her, reject her and religion Christians are of who members family her Because of most sector, NGO an lot. in job her quit a to had she appearance changed has life her then since and 2013, November on ago, months eight Islam to converted She well. as Batumi from is She sector. educational an in employee getting after decision such religion. with other acquainted to came she and herself Muslim be to forced never was she However, knows. she as far as for family her in Christians no were siblings. There five has and family big a from in Akhaltsikhe living been has family in Georgian recorded was interview Russian. translation to with The becomes. faith her stronger the Islam, studies she more the because herself Christian becoming of thought never she Nevertheless, hijab. a wears she when Georgian as accepted not is she that thinks she still, But Georgia. Christian mostly a in minority Muslim a in be to hard too not is it therefore god one in believe Georgia of Muslims and Christians both opinion, her In it. hiding not is she religion, her A Samstkhe region to capital adjacent is of Javakheti that regional -- Adjara INT10. She is a 40 year old secondary school teacher in the district center of Khulo. At the At Khulo. of center district the in teacher school secondary old year 40 a is She INT10. an and Batumi in institutions education higher the of one in student old year 21 a is She INT9. Her Batumi. in institutions educational higher the of one in student old year 20 a is She INT8. 157 for 46 years after being resettled there from Khulo. She comes She Khulo. from there resettled being after years 46 for 43

CEU eTD Collection Khulo. Georgian was interview in The recorded to English. with translation in not and sector secular a in job a getting prefer would she that, for qualifications has she although – teacher a as school religious a in working consider never would she reason, this of Turk.a Because her calling are people because also attention, of center a in being like not does she because now it wear not does She hijab. a in madrassa wearing was aTurkey she in studied there and has she that, to addition In out. drop to had reasons family and financial to due but Batumi in study to used She yet. children have lives. in Georgian recorded The was interview English. translation to with their in decision wrong a making are Christianity to convert who those and religion true the is Islam opinion, her in as Christianity, to converting of thought never she nevertheless but before, appearance surrounded her of because bank a in job is a refused was She friend. Christian one only and has she – Muslims by mostly time the all hijab wears She Turkey. in universities the of one at student a time try shewill to stopthem. toIslam, not if leave they want and was interview in Georgian.The recorded religion of choice free a have will children her But religion. family her is Islam because Christianity to converting of thought never She Christians. Georgians non-Muslim all calls involuntary she time same forgiven.be twodifferent and religionare nationality things,the Shethinksthe but that at and unrelated everyday head will and sins minor are these that thinks she but needed than less she prays to it, her used is not she because cover not does She important. more is religion intrinsic that thinks She Khulo. education. early their Georgian recorded was in interview The to English. with translation for responsible is she mother a as because her for sin a be will it Islam, leave to decide will children her if opinion, her In children. her to religion the passing is and time same the at Muslim and Georgian N1. A 3 ya l ece n te dsrc etr o hl. Se as ok n the in works also She Khulo. of center district the in teacher old year 43 A INT14. not does but married is She Khulo. of center district the from housewife old year 23 AINT13. same the at and Khulo of center district the in madrassa girls a in teacher old INT12. year A 26 of center district the in works and lives daughter, a and son a has nurse, old year INT11.42 A 44

CEU eTD Collection studies just because she wanted to learn Arabic. She likes teaching Islam but never thought that it 158 that thought never but Islam teaching likes She Arabic. learn to wanted she because just studies her selected but Turkey in language Arabic and theology studied later and Batumi in to courses Islamic went She Islam. to back turned she and Dedoplistskaro, from away moved later teacher the But admired and liked she whom school her in teacher Christian a was there because teenager a was she when Christianity to converting of thinking was She Batumi. in lives and Adjara in back Dedoplistskaro in up grew and born also and strong very isa thoughtsin. evenofconversion a because was interview in GeorgianThe recorded language. is belief her because Christianity to converting of thought never She Khulo. in and Batumi in houses prayer of lack the example for Adjara, in minority Muslim the of problems more attention general to drawing my was wholeshe religion,andinterview during the than importance less has nationality her, For time. same the at Muslim and Georgian being difficulties any experience not does and everyday hijab the wears She district. Khulo in village small a in live community.They local the in leaders religious the of one is husband Her married. are whom of both children, two has to English. translation with Georgian in recorded was interview The Tbilisi. from someone by Muslim Turkish a called been has she once, least at then even but hijab, wear not does She Khulo. in madrassa girls the in courses religious attend to preparing is and faith her strengthen to decided she conversion, of instead Thus, religions. different of be to spouses want not did she and it against was husband her but Christianity to converting of thought also she conversion, their After them. to religion teach not did and to Khulo converted them of two in children, kindergarten Christian a to them sent three she because fault her partially has is it that feels Christianity.She She Khulo. in school public a in administration A the east townin in a Georgia. region Kakheti, INT16. A 24 year old teacher in the girl's madrassa in the center of district of Khulo. She was She Khulo. of district of center the in madrassa girl's the in teacher old year 24 AINT16. She Khulo. organizationsin religious one of leader a and housewife old year 42 a is She INT15. 158 as her family was settled there from Adjara. Now her family is family her Now Adjara. from there settled was family her as 45 very much. very

CEU eTD Collection Islamic holidays, and this change was hard for her and for her four siblings. The interview was interview The siblings. four her in Georgianrecorded tofor English with translation and her for hard was change this and holidays, Islamic only celebrating started they Batumi, to moved they celebrating When well. as Easter, as was such holidays, Christian Muslim, although family, her Dedoplistskaro, In before. profession her be would 46

CEU eTD Collection Christian majority because of their religion. becausereligion. oftheir majority Christian Georgian of, stripsMuslims oftheir wereaware interviewees Georgian thethe eyesofthe in nationality of all which of identity.narrative, national This Georgian the of part crucial a is Christianity that states narrative national dominant the as Georgians, Christian the and Others Muslim the between position and affiliations.national religious their renegotiate to employ women Muslim Georgian which strategies the about talk will I addition, In level. personal a on maintenance boundary group to comes it when identity their of aspects religious and national between discrepancy experience women Muslim Georgian that show to order in them of three all discuss will I chapter this In spouse. a selecting or pork eating wine, drinking different assigning by narrative as such regulations behavior in-group nationality in differences 3) and hijab the wear who using Muslims to nationality community Georgian the from exclusion 2) be can that themes broad grounds; religious and three discourse historical using community Georgian the from exclusion 1) discussed: are there that revealed interviews The Others. the of role a them prescribes and group, national Georgian the of outside Muslims puts Georgia in narrative dominant boundaries. group biological and cultural of preservation and maintenance boundary group the to connected mostly are experience women Muslim s a spot fr sc xlso, te Goga hitas epo itrc agmns For arguments. historic employ Christians Georgian the exclusion, such for support a As ground middle a take Muslims Georgian the chapter, third the in demonstrated have I As that difficulties the that show and interviews the of results the present I chapter this In 5.1 Exclusion on Religious Grounds HistoricalDiscourse onReligious Using 5.1 Exclusion Chapter aGeorgian ofBeing Muslim 5.Difficulties As it was explained in detail in the third chapter, the chapter, third the in detail in explained was it As 47 Georgian

CEU eTD Collection celebrations. For example, I always celebrate Georgian Independence Day and other days that are that days other and Day Independence Christian Georgian and celebrate always celebrations I Georgian example, For between celebrations. parallel a be not should “there and things”(INT8) different two are nationality and Religion religion. my by Muslim and am nationality “I my off. by Georgian switched recorder voice my with Adjara in women other with chats informal during as well as interviews, the all in expressed was idea This religion. with confused be not should nationality because Muslim Georgian a being in problem no is there that state to tended respondents the general, In concepts. different two as identity national and religious separating by identity national Georgian of concept the for of Christianity importance of the dismissalGeorgian the is nation. strategy main The nation Georgian the in place everyday situations. in employed religionwhen oftheir because their from Adjarians excludes it how and alive much very is nation Georgian the of narrative Christian the that illustrate examples These (INT3). Turkey” from is Islam and Christians otherwere Georgians past the in from because Muslims be not comments should we that say sometimes They students. are there religion, about talking start we When lessons. history Christian' during hard is “it that equals said student, a is who INT3, 'Georgian lives. everyday their in them opposes same that narrative the mentioned also respondents Other (INT9). this” like thinks He die. will Georgia minority, become Christians if Because Christianity. for fight will he religion, hates he that despite and GeorgiaChristian not in is he Muslims that despite against and Christianity, fight on stands always Georgia because will he that said he but atheist, an is He man. one with conversation Facebook a had I “yesterday said: INT9 As questions. such ask who those of affiliations Muslim still you are why Christianity,so about things many know you in Adjara, here – Christianity – religion our of history about things many know teacher,you YouMuslim? a you are are why “ religion: her about her asking Khulo of people described INT10 example, hr r eea as hw Goga ulm wmn rngtae ter wy bc o the to back way their renegotiate women Muslim Georgian how ways several are There ? IT0. n hs hsoia esnn s nt awy once o te religious the to connected always not is reasoning historical this And (INT10). ” 48 People ask me everyday: me ask People Georgia, how we lost we how Georgia,

CEU eTD Collection 160 159 renegotiate to enough not is it apparently but Georgians, as self-identification their renegotiate to tend belonging. and differentof identity, between perspectives groupness differsperceived self-identification the from when this in up, ToGeorgians. sum of community imagined perceived the from the in results which Christianity, to terms between related switch involuntary closely being as Georgia of perception the nation: that with communality perceived as same the not is nation Georgian the with self-identification case, this in However,respectively. Georgian and Muslim groups, social both Georgian with self-identify to allows Muslims categories different two are nation and religion that insisting by identity national Georgia. of country the to connected closely is Christianity that idea the supports one other the while identity, national the of component is Georgia of idea the the Georgian with associated country a Christian OrthodoxChurch(INT3,INT5,INT14). and being them, for even that said them of some that, to addition In Christians. them as such calling start involuntary would they Georgians non-Muslim about asked Easter,when and or holidays Christmas religious about talk would they traditions, Georgian about asked when example, terms the between switched involuntary and themselves, Church Orthodox Georgian womenthat explain mergedMuslim shouldnot Christianitybe identities and together. Georgian way the illustrate excerpts these – (INT6) holidays” Christian celebrate don't just I patriotic. Brubaker, GeorgianPolitics in the Borderlands,” 73–75. Religion, : Ethnicity, and Pelkmans, “Uncertain in byPelkmans Divides recorded See trend research. The his was same Hence by rejecting Christianity as a core component of the Georgiantheidentity, ofnationalcomponent core asa Christianity by rejecting Hence Adjarians core a is Christianity that denies one glance: first the from opposite seem trends two These Georgian the with Georgia identify to tended respondents the time same the at Ironically, Ethnicity WithoutEthnicity Groups 160 , 28–63. Georgian 159 The exclusion of Christianity from the notion of the Georgian the of notion the from Christianity of exclusion The n and 49 Christian , this still excludes the Georgian Muslim Georgian the excludes still this , case the dissonance appears dissonance the case Georgian

and and Christian : for :

CEU eTD Collection 162 161 Georgian nation. To of part not are GeorgianMuslims the hence Others, the of attribute an as perceived is Islam and country, Christian historically an as imagined is Georgia reasons. historical and religious self-image. a positive maintain latter to discoursehelps the the everyday Muslims from comparison social of basis the of removal the case, derogative. usually is minorities of self-perception comparative the However, self-esteem. and identity self positive developing for crucial is comparison social positive groups, social minority Georgianthe Georgianthe and Muslim between majority Christian comparison social the of basis the is difference. religious expressing of result a are that experiences negative the to connected of Georgianness Georgian to the back themselves situated nation. understanding and discourse everyday in notion religious of rid getting by and Muslims Georgian and Christians Georgian between boundaries religious erased interviewees the case this In religion”. about neighbor. good very well. a Wevery have along “I get we that – wife priest's a talk she is don't And just mentioned INT13 (INT8). same.” the do they them, insult never to try I and Christianity their respect I difference. only the is relations. religion good And very have Weus. close, between differencevery are isjust a religion. “It isno friends and Christian there myexperience–Ihave Iknow own And from that religion. else's everyone respects everyone as long as friendship for important not is religion time same the at decisions, and life daily their for important is Islam that and religious very themselves consider they although that stated interviewees the of majority The differences. religious the of rejection the themselves. narrativeandit involuntaryuse dominant the of aware still are as they well, Georgian as the nation to belonging perceived and communality their Tajfel, Ethnicity, Religion, : and Politicsthe Georgian in Borderlands,”74. Pelkmans, “Uncertain Divides To sum up, Georgian Muslims are excluded from the imaginary Georgian community based on based community Georgian imaginary the from excluded are Muslims Georgian up, To sum is Muslims Georgian amongst attitude accommodating an such Pelkmans, to According is revealed, interviews the nation, Georgian the into back oneself situating of strategy Another Human Groups Categories andSocial

, 330–331. 50 ewe erin Georgian between hitas ad Georgian and Christians 161 As religion As 162 In this In

CEU eTD Collection later moved to Tbilisi to live with his family. However, their marriage lasted only few months, because months, few only family.lasted his marriage However, with their live to Tbilisi to moved later and Khulo, in here, married Her got her.They than 17. older years eight was and Muslim Georgian she a was when husband married, once was she that me told Z. and stories, personal our share to us encouraged stove, wood a on tea ending never and men, of absence the The village. the of end the at house in people only the were I and N. mother old year 42 Z., daughter old year 18 The home. at not a womanhijab. wears a happens when Muslims Georgian to nationality another prescribing by Othering particular, this In Tatars, etc. Iranians Turks, are Muslims Georgianbecause Muslims, are be not Georgians can Georgians because case, this Georgians in then be Christians, Orthodox not can Muslims case, first the in If dimension. groups two these between factor comparison forGeorgian self-esteem ofpositive the maintenance to contributes Muslims. social main the of disappearance the and groups, Muslim Georgian and Christian Georgian the between erased are boundaries religious the case, this In neighbors. or friends with interactions as such situations, everyday the in general in religion of topic the avoid to was nation Georgian the to back way one's renegotiate to the way Another nation. with Georgian groupness perceived of lack a was there time same the at but self- Georgians, their as identification affirmed they case this In Georgianness. and Christianity between parallels drawing by themselves narrative dominant this affirmed involuntarily respondents the time, same the at However, historical categories. the different two are nationality and reject religion that emphasize and Georgia to Christian of narrative was First strategies. of couple a employed respondents my this, overcome On the first night of my stay in Khulo, both men of my host family,my of men Khulo, both in my stay were of son, night the first and the On father the nationality on but religious, on not based is but one, first the to similar is theme large This 5.2 Exclusion from the Georgian from 5.2 Exclusion by Nation Muslims to OtherAssigning Nationality 51

CEU eTD Collection upiigy h ny itriwe h oe a hjb eeya ee toe ivle n religious in involved those 163 were everyday hijab Not a people. wore other who by interviewees comments and only opinions the ignore surprisingly, to able be to and hijab a wear to prepared morally be to needs one expressed, INT2 As well. as interviewees other by shared was fear same The hijab everyday,a be a accepted as wouldnot she Georgians”. “real the of perspective the from boundary the of side other the to women put can hijab a wearing more other, group,argued hairmoderate toornot. shewants cover her to chooseif a woman that isfree The goes. she everywhere everyday, hijab a wear must woman background, Muslim religious a more that a insisted from coming group, one – groups two into divided be can answers respondents' The Georgian'. 'the and Muslim' 'the between boundary strict a draws hijab a – surprising personal to sacrifices. make ready was she that protect to Z. for important so were that boundaries group Muslim of symbol a as served hijab story,the this In again. married be never would she and back her take not would family own her that risk the at husband, her left and out way ultimate the took and Muslim true as herself see not could woman. true toMuslim not be allowed a awas familywhereshe to leave decision Z's. for approval their showing thus back her took they and district Khulo in family her to returned She her. to dead him declared and husband her left she that much, so religion her valued Z. but her, around Georgians other the all like look should Z. that were arguments mother-in-law's Her heels. high and blouses open skirts, short on put her made away, dresses long and a hijab as her put dressing would Muslim, stop should Z. that demanded she cow”: a “was Z., to according mother-in-law, her Yuval Davis, -- As women are constructed as the symbolic bearers of group boundaries in everyday life, everyday in boundaries group of bearers symbolic the as constructed are women As not is it And another. or way one in hijab mentioned interviews the of respondents the All Z. it, Without women. Muslim devoted for hijab the of importance the demonstrates story This Gender and NationGender , 45. real 52 Georgian way. dressingin ifa started Muslim she In the opinion of the INT7, who does not not does who INT7, the of opinion the In Muslim Other – Christian Georgian Christian – Other Muslim group wear 163

CEU eTD Collection ia, wmn ae fre o dfn o ut ter rlgos peeecs u lo ter national their also but preferences, religious their they society become eyesofthe in as the belonging, Turks, Tatars orIranians: just not defend to forced are women hijab, a boundaryas keepers. role their discarding partially by society in attention unwanted avoid and spheres, private more in only affiliations religious their express to tend women these Hence, covered. fully always is head her home, at is she when And hair. her showed partially that head her on scarf moderate of a just center wearing the Khulo to traveling was family host my of relative neighbor a when case, another witnessed I that. do would Muslim every even her,not to according – surprised pleasantly was family host my of sphere. daughter the covered, hair my with time first private the for Khulo of center district the to walking was I When more a in home, at head her covers only She acceptable. not is it as school in head her covers never she that me told school village small a from K. teacher English in. live they which village the or home family the as such settings, familiar more in only hair their percent, cover to 30 tend women about Christians and population the of percent 60 about comprise Muslims locals, the by estimates to according where, district, Khulo in even But Muslims. than Orthodox Georgian more are there Batumi in that fact the by explained be can this but hair, their cover who women any sees very important. ofIslam to were whoma sharedgroupvalues and activities The interviews provided a couple of explanations for such behavior. such for explanations w all, of of couple a First provided interviews The rarely one Batumi, In hijab. the wearing of trend interesting very a observe can one Adjara, In does not speak Georgian, she is Iranian! I was in shock – excuse me, I am Georgian! It is kind of a problem, know.(INT9)you of kind is It Georgian! am I me, excuse – shock in was I Iranian! is she Georgian, speak not does she oh, said: one another answered, I before but something, me asked man and woman one walking, was I Georgian. speak not does she maybe Georgian, not is she maybe that say people some streets the this. In like look awkward... I be can look, – it And you on are eyes all and street the in walk I then And 53 hen they wear they hen

CEU eTD Collection 164 will others, thusGod forgive sin,it to sincompared isa small is a (INT10, INT11). them group. the of values shared core the from herself distances she it, wear to not decides person a when Thus, Islam. of values group social important most the and main, the captures hijab the that suggests it, wear to reason main the as God of mentioning (INT1). God” The for but men, for not myself, for not hand, other the On not. it wear because “I Muslim fora wearareal woman hijab isnecessary to from theit interviews, drawing or hijab a wear to wants one if decision personal a is it that state to quick sector. ofhijabpublic wearing in regulates norexplicitly onPublicimplicitly neither Service Law sector. private the in employees existing The alone let employees, public for hijabs on officialban no is there day this to But sphere. public a in working while hijabs wearing forbids that officialregulation an sphere public other and teachers The hijab. a wearing was she because sector governmental a in position a get not did also INT2 of acquaintance an scarf, head a wearing was she because bank a in job a refused was INT12 hijab, a wearing started and Islam to converted she when job her quit to had INT9 problem. practical more a also but nation, Georgian backs. their behind or faces, their to either lives, their in point some at Iranians or Tatars Turks, called been have respondents the all Almost situations. everyday in discomfort cause that identity of between notions different disagreement a see we Again, it. with identification self their despite nation, Georgian of part a as perceived not are they hijab, a wear women when affiliation. national Therefore, their also but The Law Service onThePublic To negotiate this position some women take a stance that states that even if not wearing a hijab a wearing not if even that states that stance a take women some position this To negotiate were Batumi in or Khulo in met I that Muslims other as well as respondents my of majority The the from women excluding by discomfort psychological only not causes hijab a However, beliefs, religious their defend to only not stance, personal a take to them requires hijab a Thus, . 54 employees in Khulo were convinced that there is there that convinced were Khulo in employees 164

CEU eTD Collection social groups. social their affirm women the heads, their covering of Georgianness well. as identification Islamic their and keep traditions Georgian and Christian also but way,this In Georgian Muslim, only tradition. even and not Christian, of a followers also as but Islamic, only not is hijab a that stating by nation Georgian the to back oneself situate to is strategy Another minor a as scarf a wear to not decision their downplay to is them of employ. One women that strategies other their are there group, with nation in blend and hijab a wear to not choosing or belonging, national their defend constantly and hijab a wear to choosing either to addition In to. belongs she group religious the of values core the from herself distances she then but society Georgian the into blends she head, her cover to not choses she If Turk. a as outsider, an as seen is and nation Georgian the from excluded is she head, her cover to choses she If time. same the at nation Georgian the to and group social Muslim the to belonging her oftheir oftradition country. religionbutisa part also signoftheir it are not a hijabs their that stating by nation their into back themselves position women way this a In tradition. is Georgian headscarf thus, Christian, the that stating by thought this on elaborated INT15 it”(INT10). do not do they but sin a is it that know They it. do not do they but well, as it wear must In women Christian scarf. a Christianity, a without be and dresses short such wear to Christian religion also any in but acceptable Muslim, not is only “It not tradition: is head ones covering that insisted INT15 as well as INT10 The third broad theme encompasses different cultural customs and their regulations in both in regulations their and customs cultural different encompasses theme broad third The renegotiate must she where situation a into woman Georgian Muslim a puts hijab a up, To sum example, For situation. this of out way another took respondents the of some that, to addition In

As Pelkmans writes, one of the of one writes, Pelkmans As sin 5.3 Different Regulations In-Group that does not result in a deviation from the core tenets of Islam. of tenets core the from deviation a in result not does that main difficulties in being both Muslim and Georgian for Georgian and Muslim both being difficultiesin main 55

CEU eTD Collection 168 167 166 165 that argue traditions feast Georgian about write who Anthropologists supra. during roles female research. Pelkmans in did counterparts work. isat she when INT10 drink a for over friends – has he when glasses and cups occasions cleans never who husband her about any complained without even more, drink to tend that ones the are husbands their that out stressed also they But etc. guests of Year, New arrival birthdays, as such – occasions special on only Georgian” still ornot matter–Iam if Idrink not does (INT2). it is more. is why wine, it That drink pork and eat beonly Georgian to tonot But is drink wine? not do mtsvadi pork eat not do and wine drink don't I when pork. And eat not do and wine drink not do Muslims we supra, at sit we when example, “For her: for problem a not is it why explains She (INT2). Georgian” real being from me prevent not does it that think I and drink don't I but on, so and tradition their is it that Georgian] [being “It them: to problematic Muslimness seem not does Islam in restriction religions. follow that other wives take to allowed are men Muslim whereas families, Muslim into marry only can women Muslim that regulation a is lives daily their larger effect issue. The on big a such not is consumption alcohol women during role social the – customs Georgian as perceived are what to connected is in Adjara, men Muslim Georgian Pelkmans, RussianBarbecue; in shashlik She used word Ethnicity, Religion, : and Politicsthe Georgian in Borderlands,”71. Pelkmans, “Uncertain Divides In general, the respondents did not give much importance to drinking wine as their male their as wine drinking to importance much give not did respondents the general, In INT10, INT11, but drink themselves wine, families and they their that INT13,INT14mentioned alcohol the but Georgian culture, in important To is wine that agreed interviewees the with, start supras supras 166 Defending the BorderDefending the 167 only when it comes to drinking wine and eating pork. Especially wine. Georgians think Georgians wine. Especially pork. eating and wine drinking to comes it when only , Georgians are surprised – how come, you are Georgian and you do not eat pork and pork eat not do you and Georgian are you come, how – surprised are Georgians , muslimoba and alcohol consumption related to that. to related consumption alcohol and , and

muslimness , 125–136. is the most direct the most this is translation for word. 168 It can be explained by looking at the different male and male different the at looking by explained be can It 56 165 However, as I will demonstrate later,for demonstrate will I as However, ofit with conflicts supra

CEU eTD Collection 171 170 169 the that said INT16 and INT9 INT6, INT5, INT2, children. Muslim raise will they that and Muslim belong to. groupthey social the that men. non-Muslim marry to women Muslim forbids Islam because men than women affect to likely more are spouses selecting Georgianas women. actively to society from role pressure their jeopardize not does Islam in restriction such alcohol the therefore do, men as feel supras in participate not do women Muslim Georgian that argue I anyone. Thus, offending without drinks soft to switch or sips small take to allowed are women but toast, each after wine of glasses their finish to men from expected is It toasting. and drinking of means by proved is participants of masculinity the and domain, masculine to belongs supra that is idea perceived widely the supras, in participate actively to tend women if even arguethat Georgia, I in woman a being be also supras. can in participate women fully as and supras, toastmasters in roles prescribed static, play not do women and men that argues static this challenges anthropologist Linderman another However, themselves. amongst bond to kitchen the in space informal more a to retire to tend sometimes and food of preparation the for responsible are women while drinking, and toasting formal rather through manhood their perform and role leading a take men it. the nutshell, in roles female and male distinguished clearly with society Georgian reflects Positions,” 756–757. Islam: in “InterfaithLeeman, Marriage the Legal An of Examination Teory the Behind Traditional Reformist and “The Feast.” Linderman, Gendered Post theSoviet RedIntelligentsia in -- -- Mühlfried, Georgia.” Grant and Eaters, “Banquets, Manning, Those respondents who were not married, unanimously stated that their future husband must be must husband future their that stated unanimously married, not were who respondents Those on regulations then lives, daily their in men for important more are drinking of regulations If decision to marry a Muslim is not solely the respondents', but is also one of the rules of the of rules the of one also is but respondents', the solely not is Muslim a marry to decision Semiotics Drink of andDrinking 171 This rule shapes the decisions of women that I talked to, because it means it because to, talked I that women of decisions the shapes rule This understanding of supras, and the male and female roles in it, and it, in roles female and male the and supras, of understanding ; Kotthoff,; Social of “The Georgian Semiotics Toast Performances”; 170 But from my several years of personal experience of experience personal of years several my from But 57 169 To put it in a in it put To

CEU eTD Collection Also, the restriction on marrying into another religious group does not seem to cause any identity- any cause to seem not does group religious another into marrying on restriction the Also, their perform to event crucial a is it men for whereas supras, in participate actively to expected not are women that means which society, Georgian in roles gender different by explained be can extent. This same the to affect women not did it shown, has Pelkmans as men Muslim Georgian amongst conflicts identity caused wine drinking if But Georgians. amongst and Muslims Georgian as in general. ofthe not population aIslamic as part Muslims and defined clearly is women these by reproduced biologically and culturally be will and is that group social the hence religion, as importance equal of is belonging national that shows this – Georgians marry to want preferably or Muslims, Georgian to married are majority the that, to addition In respondents. for acceptable is Muslimness of reproducers cultural and biological of role the that in the family, quarrels less as such children'supbringing. decisionsreligious onthe oreasier This shows arguments, personalized more with norm group social this supported they contrary, the On Muslims. and Islam of preservation and reproduction throughout biological ofit generations. continuation cultural the to to connected connected is more reason was this reason first reproduction, the If (INT8). Muslims as raised be will definitely children the that so or INT9), (INT8, family the in quarrels less be would there so religion well. as father be Muslim their bornintoas will Islam, be will children her because Islam, of reproducers biological of role the performing are women case, this In religion. their in forbidden is it because them, with involved romantically be or them, by attracted be never could and friends, as only men Christian Georgian see they that explained further, even and went IN5 and INT2 husbands. future their of choice their behind reasoning main the are Islam of regulations To sum up, this third theme can be defined as different cultural norms and regulations amongst regulations and norms cultural different as defined be can theme third this up, To sum only marry must they that fact to the due any discomfort mentioned respondents the none of But one of be should spouses the that was man, non-Muslim a marrying not for reasoning Another 58 nationalized masculinity. nationalized

CEU eTD Collection protectors, as they do not object to the requirements by their social group to doso. groupto social requirementsbytheir donot to object the they as protectors, boundary group social as role their perform to willing are women that demonstrating by hypothesis this supports also chapter this in discussed theme broad third The verified. is identity their of aspects Georgian and Muslim between experience they discrepancy the for account partially can protectors boundary social as women of role perceived the that loyal hypothesis a my as Hence member. status group their Muslim jeopardizing are they then “Georgian”, look and hijab a wear to not decide they If nation. Georgian perceived from exclusion their to leads this but boundaries, group Muslim when other it words, in Georgianput and defend mark lookMuslim, like Muslimthey to women decide Toappearance. their on based Georgiannation from excluded are they time same the at but community Islamic to belonging their express they hijabs, wear they When appearance. their on based nationality Womengendered. another solely prescribed is get theme second the then tendencies, same the revealed national dominant men the Muslim Georgian on reasons, research Pelkmans' because gender-neutral, religious and universal more on is narrative based is exclusion of theme first the If appearance. their or narrative historical dominant of basis a on excluded are they when groups social respective a prescribing different and thirdly, them, to nationality different exist there in-group regulations. by nation Georgian the from exclusion their is it second, reasons, religious on based nation Georgian the from exclusion their is it all, of identity. First women Muslim Georgian of aspects national and religious about talking when discussed be should that themes broad three are there that identity. their revealed research of aspects My Georgian and Muslim between discrepancy a experience socialMuslim group. their personalized affirm that, giving doing by by and restriction reasons, this support women Muslim Georgian – either conflict related The first and the second theme show women constantly renegotiating themselves back to the to back themselves renegotiating constantly women show theme second the and first The that stated be can it hypotheses, my to back Coming oe sbooia n utrlcultural and biological as roles 59 Georgian Muslim women in Adjara in women Muslim Georgian reproducers of the Georgian the of reproducers

CEU eTD Collection 173 172 However, soMuslim: Christian, husbandbecome stayed notshe want to her did step. this made children her of two when Christianity to convert to wanted INT14 lives. their of point group strong keeping on keen are boundaries. respondents my that showed interviews the as values, group accommodation of strategy a choose to seem Muslims situation. minority uncomfortable the of out ways obvious most the and easiest of one to seems Christianity to converting by assimilation and group, minority on the pressure as put Muslims chapter, third the in shown as Georgians, the of imaginary national the of outside Islam of followers the of positioning the with together Church, Orthodox Georgian the of expansion ongoing This religions. minority other all to compared Church this to treatment preferential gives that legislation national existing of because Islam, than positions stronger has GOC The schools. public the in curriculum history the through and institutions educational Christian through churches, new building through executed is expansion This Adjara. of areas Muslim former the in (GOC) Church Orthodox Georgian from conversion to women OrthodoxChristianity. prevents group, social Muslim Georgian the of reproducers biological and cultural main the being of perception the 2) and Christianity; GeorgianOrthodox to conversion from women prevents boundaries, t 1) that, hypotheses Georgian Orthodox Christianity. secondset of oftheto supportmy interviews analysis content the Iuse Ibid., 335. Tajfel, Only two out of fifteen respondents admitted that they wanted to change their religion at some at religion their change to wanted they that admitted respondents fifteen of out two Only Georgian the of expansion ongoing an is there that chapter, fourth the in showed have I to convert to not choice respondents' the to related findings my present I chapter, this In Human Groups Categories andSocial he perception of being the main protectors of the Georgian Muslim social group social Muslim Georgian the of protectors main the being of perception he Chapter 6.StayingMuslim , 331. 60 173 , and try to retain their separate identity and identity separate their retain to try and , 172 However, the Georgian the However,

CEU eTD Collection much, and that was the main reason she wanted to convert to Christianity. In addition to that, in that, to cover and addition dressed Muslims way the like not did In and Christians by surrounded Christianity. was she Dedoplistskaro, to convert to wanted she reason main the was that and much, very her admired She Christian. was who teacher good very a had she school, public the in grade 11th in was she when and Islam, her taught family the in one Georgia.No eastern in town a Dedoplistskaro, Khulomadrassa. in studyingthe Islam start and go to age her women of group a organizing is she that said later she Muslim, good a be to pretends just she that said she although enough, Interestingly group. religious her different a want to not belong to did spouse she as Christian, become to not decision husband's her was Muslim, staying her to opposed for reason as Georgian language, main the Arabic. The in pray to able be would she that her for important is it that, to addition In peace. with brought but people, on forced not was it as Georgian (INT14) not want husband Christian, to husbanddoes becomeI and don't want wife differentto be of religions. Simply,person. wanted becauseChristianitywanted I topray intheGeorgianI language.But as my there bigdifference that is no between religions. tobelieve ismain inGodand good The importance be a by was force. Today one no forces tobecome But one veryeither or wellMuslim I Christian. understand I don't know,because alwaysislike Georgians, it this... For herewas Christianity time. the all And Islam to Christianity. good a Muslim. Iagree children. asAlthough myhusband I convertwith my did am Muslim, not want to tochangeaisone'sreligionbig sin. that Also,myhusband did not want I to pretend convert. Now to be main Georgian,forwasisThe reasonme Christianity that Georgianmore thanalso But I Islam. think INT16 said that she wanted to become Christian when she was a teenager, when she lived in lived she when teenager, a was she when Christian become to wanted she that said INT16 more is Christianity that was Christianity to converting for reason main the that stated INT14 moreis Christianity 61

CEU eTD Collection 174 (INT5). that” change can ever nothing And Muslim. a die will I and raised born, was “I that stating by community Islamic the to belonging unconditional their reaffirm to tended respondents the that, to addition In values. core core and its principals from deviates individual the that indicates group religious given a leaving of idea an even words, other In sin. a is conversion of thought the even that state they all, of First reasons. following give up. them to willing not are group minority the of members the majority,and the from different are that norms culture and values strong of existence the is strategy such to preconditions the of one Tajfel, to According whole. a as society in valued success of goals and marks achieve to seek identity, time separate same the at but own their retain to attempt minority of members when strategy: accommodation called Tajfel what future. the in point some at Tbilisi in job a get to planning is INT16 and PhD, a be to for study to planning needs is INT14 time: same the at career a planning also are them of both It that mentioned madrassa. girls' the in teacher religious a as works now INT16 and Quran studying start to is planning INT14 beliefs: and values group their intomore themselves to immerse decided also but group, religious their leave not did only not respondents Both similar. are outcomes the different, language. Arabic the of because teacher,just religious theology a being studied and However, herself imagined never she Khulo. in madrassa the in Quran the teaches she now and Turkey, in language Arabic and theology study to went she that, After Islam. study to Batumi to her sent family her 16, turned she when that, after Soon Dedoplistskaro. in stayed she and Tbilisi to moved later teacher the However, themselves. Ibid. The last quote brings us to the main idea of the continuation of Islam throughout generations. throughout Islam of continuation the of idea main the to us brings quote last The the on decision their based conversion of thought even never they that state who Those are cases both in Christianity to convert to wanting for reasons the although that see we Here 174

62 This is an example of example an is This

CEU eTD Collection 175 themselves position respondents the how looked I traditions, family and religiosity strong expressed traditionsofGeorgia.the on than religion, of case the in ancestors the and family the to respect on emphasis more put in Adjara remember.can they as long as generations, Muslims the that Pelkmans' observation tocorresponds This several for Muslim are families their that stated proudly – family mixed a from comes who INT14 and Christian is family whose INT9 from apart all – respondents thirteen religion, family their about asked When well. as generations previous the of respect to due but generations, future the of because religion. to another convert to decided ifchildren blame their the to take were ready and responsibility their as families their in Islam of continuation the saw interviewees To the conclude, (INT14). education” religious them give to failed I parent, a it. As do to time have not did I But Islam. them teach would I up, grew they when that thought I convert, not would they that thought “I stance: a mother. as Christianity, to converted children three of two out whose INT14, self -blaming a took also sin their and fault, their be would this religion, this leave to decide would point some at children future their if that said children) no have and married not are them of (both INT5 and INT2 (INT5). religion” about me to talking was also he time, had he when and, religion my for love have would I that care took also he But much. so participating not was he why is that and working was father My wife. house a is she as home at always was she Because mother. their My than Islam?] about more you home taught stay “[Who to spouses. tend they and child, the to closer are they as children their to Islam teaching ones the are reality,mothers in that stated interviewees other and they child, the of education religious the in involved be should grandparents all and parents both that indicated INT9) INT6, INT5, (INT4, them of some children. Although Muslim raise to duty mother's the as it saw interviewees The Pelkmans, In order to present a better portrayal of reasons behind their decision not to convert, besides convert, to not decision their behind reasons of portrayal better a present to order In only not converting from women prevents family the in Islam of preservation of need The Defending the BorderDefending the 175

, 167. 63

CEU eTD Collection 178 177 176 groupboundaries. established the jeopardize not did minority the from group religious majority the groups, to mobility individual their hence religious Christian Orthodox Georgian or Muslim are either They of members lens. real negative not as a portrayed through perceived are Christianity to converts the Muslims, Georgian majority. the from different are that views own their have group minority given a of given a to members the that and group; of this members the all for consequences social certain has group belonging minority and assigned being of consequences social the a that become majority; and the group of this member leave to individual an for difficult least at or impossible is it and others the from separate is group minority given a that – belief of systems three on based is boundaries group of perception clear The perceived. are boundaries group the clearly how on depends group minority certain a to belonging of awareness the Tajfel, to According boundaries. group social strengthening group's and the self-image. contribute groups,to self-esteem ones social positively other original). in are”(emphasis we because are we what are Tajfel,“[w]e quote To trend. fashionable a following were they gain, material for way a as or trend, fashionable a following as explained was conversion Their Christian. real nor Muslim real neither as influence, else's someone under someone as choice, thewrong made that someone as sinners, as portrayed still were they Christianity, about to talking Islam when from disappear converts not did choice free a being religion of narrative the although them: by well perceived not were Christianity to converts The Christianity. to converted has who relative a or friend close acquaintance, one least at had respondents the converted. All have who those towards Ibid., 314. Ibid. Tajfel, To sum up, only two of fifteen interviewees (here I exclude the recent convert to Islam) thought Islam) to convert recent the exclude I (here interviewees fifteen of To two only up, sum and preserving of way a also is group in the left who those towards attitude negative This Human Groups Categories andSocial 176 In other words, positive self-evaluation in comparison to members of members to comparison in self-evaluation positive words, other In , 323. 64 they 178 177 In the case of case the In are not what not are

CEU eTD Collection Orthodox Christianity. Georgian to conversion from women prevents group social Muslim Georgian of reproducers biological from women and cultural main the of being perception the 2) that Georgianand to conversion Orthodox Christianity; prevents boundaries group social Muslim Georgian the of protectors main the being group. new ofthe members real became and group former the of members real were it across move to managed who those that denying by boundaries group strengthening and preserving of way a is also but self-evaluation, positive a achieve to helps only not members ingroup former the towards attitude negative This Christianity. ofIslam. continuation cultural and biological a ensure to it, rephrase to or – it in role their and generations future the to past the from families their in Islam of continuation the on emphasis put also they that, to addition In sin. a is religion another to converting of thought the even and Muslims, real are they because Christianity group. Muslim the to connection own their strengthen to chose they instead – did them of none However,Christianity. to converting of These findings are in accordance with my second set of hypotheses that: 1) t 1) that: hypotheses of set second my with accordance in are findings These to Islam from converts new the towards stance negative a took respondents the addition, In Others stated that they never even had a thought of converting to converting of thought a had even never they that stated Others 65 he perception of perception he

CEU eTD Collection ae tm, Goga ainl iett s nt sclr s i s coey itrwnd wt Georgian with intertwined closely is it as secular, not is identity national Georgian time, same identity.Georgian the their At of importance in increase an and reference identity main the as Islam of Georgian (mostlyIput Muslimfourhypotheses: forward men byPelkmans), on Adjara in done research previous on as well as culture group of bearers as role women' emphasize that literature feminist on Based instead. experiences women' into looked and religion and nationalism ofidentity.concepts However, studies on approachin isused mainstream that the masculine Idiscarded nevertheless. the minority Islamic in difficulties these overcoming in contemporaryGeorgia, stay decision their to reasoning behind and the In particular, difficulties the Idiscussed Georgian experiencebybeing they that of Muslims, ways 4. 3. 2. 1. I started my argument by showing that Adjarians have experienced a decline in the importance the in decline a experienced have that Adjarians showing by argument my started I Cooper's and Brubaker's and Tajfel's on based is thesis my of background theoretical The aspects ofGeorgian the and national religious at In my thesis, Ilooked Muslim women identity. group prevents women from conversion to women Georgian from conversion group prevents Orthodox Christianity. Georgian ofsocial Muslim reproducers biological and cultural main the being of perception The to womenGeorgian from conversion prevents OrthodoxChristianity; boundaries group social Muslim Georgian the of protectors main the being of perception The the for account partially can and Georgian Muslim experiencebetween oftheir they discrepancy identity; aspects protectors boundary social as women of role perceived The identity; oftheir aspects Georgian and Muslim between discrepancy a experience Adjara in women Muslim Georgian Chapter 7.Conclusion 66

CEU eTD Collection to the respective social groups when they are excluded on a basis of dominant historical narrative or narrative historical dominant of basis a on excluded are they when groups social respective the to isverified. identity aspects oftheir national and religious regulations. between experiencediscrepancy that firstwomen hypothesis the Therefore, a different byprescribing nation theredifferent and third, them, exist to nationality in-group the Georgianfrom Georgian from it reasons, the exclusion onreligious istheir nation second, based aspects ofGeorgian and national religious Muslim women identity. exclusion istheir it First ofall, there that revealed analysis districtofKhulo. from the data observation onparticipant as the well districtofKhulo,as Thein time. the same at nation Georgian the from themselves distancing avoiding and Islam of continuation cultural and biological the ensuring and boundaries, group strengthen to trying by strategy accommodation an for opt and process, interviews the of analysis the as However, factors these of All villages. secluded a has already Orthodoxy Georgian in Lower hegemony in andUpper isexpanding Adjara isprevailing in more Islam well, as while Adjara space. public claiming and education public using by Adjara Islamic former in influence state its the expand to by Church the Church allows treatment Orthodox preferential This Georgian authorities. the of treatment preferential institutionalized an to led ofdistinctidentifications. negotiation constant a to leads undoubtedly position a such and Others, the as alienation complete and nation Georgian the in membership complete between Muslims Georgian puts this imagery,and national the in Orthodoxy The first and the second themes show that women are constantly renegotiating themselves back themselves renegotiating constantly are women that show themes second the and first The and in conducted Batumi interviews semi-structured ofsixteen My isbasedonanalysis research identity, national Georgian and Church Orthodox Georgian the of intertwining this Moreover, are three broad themes that should be discussed when talking about talkingabout when shouldbe discussed that broadare themes three combine to put pressure to assimilate on the minority Muslims. minority the on assimilate to pressure put to combine revealed, Georgian Muslim women resist the assimilation the resist women Muslim Georgian revealed, 67

CEU eTD Collection nation by stating that a hijab is not only Islamic, but also a Christian, and even Georgian tradition. In tradition. Georgian even and Christian, a also but Islamic, only not is hijab a that stating by nation Georgian the to back oneself situate to is strategy Islam. Another of tenets core the from deviation a in employ. a scarfas minor not to decision downplay weara their isto ofthem One women that strategies other are there group, nation their with in blend and hijab a wear to not choosing Muslim“Georgian”, a as loyal their groupmember. jeopardizing status they are then look and hijab a wear to not decide they If Georgiannation. perceived the from exclusion their to leads this but boundaries, group Muslim defend and mark they Muslim, like look to decide women Muslim Georgian when Hence appearance. their on based nation Georgian from excluded are they time same the at community,but Islamic the to belonging their express they hijabs, wear they When appearance. their on based nationality another prescribed get women as gendered, solely is nationality different forGeorgian ofpositive self-esteem maintenance Muslims. the to contributes groups two these between factor comparison social main the of disappearance the and groups, Muslim Georgian and Christian Georgian the between erased are boundaries religious the case, this In neighbors. or friends with interactions as such situations, everyday the in religion of topic to was nation Georgian the to back way one's renegotiate to the way Another nation. with Georgian groupness perceived of lack a was there time same the at but self- Georgians, their as identification affirmed they case this In Georgianness. and Christianity between parallels drawing by themselves narrative dominant this affirmed involuntarily they time, same the at However, categories. different two are nationality and religion that emphasize and Georgia Christian of narrative historical To tendencies. same the exclusion, revealed this men overcome Muslim gender-neutral, and universal more is narrative national dominant the and reasons religious on based is exclusion of theme first The appearance. their I prescribing by exclusion of theme second the then gender-neutral, was theme first the If n addition to either choosing to wear a hijab and constantly defend their national belonging, or belonging, national their defend constantly and hijab a wear to choosing either to addition n my respondents employed a couple of strategies. First was to reject the reject to was First strategies. of couple a employed respondents my 68 sin that that does not result not does avoid the avoid

CEU eTD Collection helps to achieve a positive self-evaluation, but also is a way of preserving and strengthening group strengthening and preserving of way a is also but self-evaluation, positive a achieve to helps only not members ingroup former the towards attitude negative Tajfel,such Christianity. Following to ofIslam. continuation and cultural biological on words, other in or – it in role their on and generations, future the to past the from families their in jeopardize would conversion respondents My sin”). a is “it – of words their in (or belonging thought a even that believe others the and beliefs, religion strengthening for opted later Christianity to converting of thought who those Even group. social Islamic in membership their continue to devoted are respondents my that shows it did, actually identity. oftheir aspects Georgian and Muslim the between experience they discrepancy the for account partially can protectors and biological as roles Georgian reproducers ofthe cultural Muslimgroup. social their affirm that, doing by and reasons, personalized giving by restriction this support women Muslim Georgian – either conflict identity-related any cause to seem not does group religious another into marrying on restriction the And masculinity. nationalized their perform to event crucial a is it men for whereas supras, in participate actively to expected not are women that means which society, Georgian in roles gender different by explained be can This extent. same the to womenaffect not did shown, has Pelkmans as men GeorgianMuslim amongst conflicts identity caused enough, Interestingly groups. social Georgian and Islamic of protectors boundary women affirmheads, the Georgianness their well. Islamicidentificationas their and keep their covering of traditions Georgian and Christian also but Muslim, only not of followers way, as this In addition to that, the respondents took a negative stance towards the new converts from Islam from converts new the towards stance negative a took respondents the that, to addition In them of none and Christianity, to converting of thought interviewees fifteen of two only As boundary social as women of role perceived the that hypothesis my support findings These the as women of role the out stressed – regulations in-group different – theme broad third The 69 put emphasis on the continuation of Islam of continuation the on emphasis put drinking wine, that wine, drinking their own their their

CEU eTD Collection o uue rsac n Msi rus i eri rm cmaaie prpcie (Adjarians, minority perspective hijab. grouprights,wearing as such a cultural concerning papers comparative policy for from contribution a Georgia as or Turks) in Meskhetian Kists, groups Azerbaijanis, Muslim on research future for contribution aas serve also can It perspective. feminine from this issue at by looking identity of aspects of reproducers biological and cultural Georgian Georgian from conversion Muslim grouppreventsto women social OrthodoxChristianity.main the being of perception the 2) that and Christianity; Orthodox Georgian to conversion from women prevents boundaries group social Muslim Georgian ofthe group. new members real became group and former the of members real were it across move to managed who those that denying by boundaries This research was intended to fill the literature gap on Georgian Muslim religious and national and religious Muslim Georgian on gap literature the fill to intended was research This the of protectors main the being of perception the 1) that hypotheses my support findings These 70

CEU eTD Collection 20. 19. 18. 17. 16. 15. 14. 13. 12. 11. 10. 9. 8. 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. Eastmond, Eastmond, Antony. Emile. Durkheim, Practice Ideologies, and Local Ideals, Dragadze, Tamara. Communism.”In under Soviet Domestication ofReligion “The Dowling, Edward. Theodore EuropeanSoutheast Politics Nation ofOne or Muslim?with Bohdana. Dilemma “Bosniak Dimitrova, Two Names.” 1998. http://escholarship.org/uc/item/7hc733q3. Violence In Collapse.” Soviet Georgi.Derluguian, “The Tale of Two Resorts: Abkhazia and Since the Before and Ajaria Caucasus Svante. Cornell, Petersburg 2011. forCulturalResearch, ofthe Institute Russian Branch of DialogeUnderstanding andMutual Perspectives In forResponses.” Search in Georgia: Modern and Islam Nino.“Christianity Chikovani, and Challenges The Experience, andGlobalizationThe Caucasus “Georgian Beka. Chedia, Nationalism Today: New the ofthe Challenges Millennium.” Facing Communities Pomaks.” Bulgarian the Brunnbauer, Discourses. Nation-State and Minority Identities: Ulf.“Histories and Caseof The Brubaker, Rogers. 1998. SAGE, Perspectives International Bar-Tal, Identity.” ofSocial an Daniel. as Expression Beliefs “Group In University, Shota State Rustaveli Batumi 2014. ———. Office,Caucasus Regional 2011. ge.boell.org/downloads/Ruslan_Baramidze.pdf. In in Ruslan. “Islam Baramidze, Adjara -Comparative of Analysis Two Communities in Adjara.” 335–53. doi:10.1080/02634930701702399. Georgia1.” in Post-Soviet ———. “Islam 335–53. 1,2007): 3 (September in Post-Soviet “Islam Raoul Georgia.” Motika. and Bayram, Balci, 2012. “Muslim Medea. Badashvili, Women’s IdentityIssues Georgia.” in Post-Soviet New York, J. Intisar Azzam, http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cerd/docs/ngos/AMC_Georgia79.pdf. ofEthnicMinorities. Group Monitoring March2,2014. Accessed A of State the onthe Report Georgia Muslim Community in Azerbaijani Spread of Nationalism O’Gorman. BenedictRichard Anderson, Changing Identities: Changing Armenia, GeorgiaAzerbaijan, , edited by Beverly Crawford and Ronnie D. Lipschutz, Lipschutz, D. and Crawford Ronnie byBeverly , edited Vol. uciaspubs/research/98, The Muslim Community of GeorgiaThe MuslimCommunity (Years Politics andState 1991-2012) . Taylor 2000. & Francis, 1(1998).http://www-gewi.kfunigraz.ac.at/csbsc/ulf/pomak_identities.htm. Small Nations andGreat Powers: A in the Ethnopolitical Conflict Study of Gender and Religion: Druze Women andReligion: Gender The Elementary Forms of ReligiousLife Forms The Elementary Ethnicity WithoutEthnicity Groups Royal Imagery in Imagery Medieval GeorgiaRoyal The Myth of “Ethnic Conflict”: Politics, Economics, and“Cultural” Politics, Economics, of Conflict”: “Ethnic The Myth . Verso, 1991. In and out of the Collective: Papers on Former Soviet Block Rural Block onFormer Papers Collective: Soviet of the In andout , edited by Stephen byStephen , edited Worchel Francisko andMorales, 93–113. J World of Context Culture: Contemporary Religionsin the New 2, no. 2 (2001): 94–108. 2,no.2(2001): Sketches of Georgian of Sketches Church History 5,no.1–2(2011): 34. Bibliography , edited by C. M. Hann. Routledge, 2004. Routledge, Hann. byC.M. , edited Imagined Communities: Reflections onthe Communities: Reflections Originand Imagined Central Central Asian Survey 71 . Harvard University Press, 2004. . HarvardUniversity , edited by Dimitri Spivak. St. Peterburg: byDimitri , edited St. . Druze Heritage Foundation, 2007. Foundation, . DruzeHeritage . Heinrich Boell Foundation South Foundation Boell . Heinrich . Penn State Press,. PennState 1998. . Oxford Press, University 2001. 26, no. 3 (September 2007): 2007): 26,no.3(September . Elibron.com, Central SurveyAsian . Human Rights . Human Social Identity: Identity: Social 1979. . Batumi: . Batumi: Socialism: 26,no.

CEU eTD Collection 41. 40. 39. 38. 37. 36. 35. 34. 33. 32. 31. 30. 29. 28. 27. 26. 25. 24. 23. 22. 21. ———. Objects.” Secular OldGeorgian Paul. and Cosmology: “Materiality Manning, Sacred, as and Sublime, Churches EuropeEast Review Joy. Laura Linderman, a Georgian Feast: Experiencing Gendered “The Supra.” 1993. NorthernUniversity Illinois Press, Batalden.DeKalb: K byStephen edited Russia, Orthodox Ukraine, andGeorgia Religious Identity in of TheRecovery God: Seeking Fairy,Lilienfeld, Von. ofthe State ontheGeorgian Current “Reflections In Church and Nation.” Liles, Thomas. http://goo.gl/TNQH1D. Traditional Positions.” and Reformist Leeman, in Islam: Marriage Alex B.“Interfaith Legal An ofthe Examination Teory of Sociology Review and Michèle, Lamont, Virág Molnár. Sciences.” Social in the Study ofBoundaries “The 2166(94)00063-K. Activity.” Kotthoff, SemioticsofGeorgian Social “The Helga. Toast Cultural Genreas Oral Performances: andEditedwith Joselian, Rev. Notes, by the Additional S.C.Malan Platon. Joselian, 2010. Routledge, tean. Leu byLucian edited Georgian———. “The In OrthodoxChurch.” doi:10.1080/09637498908431439. .” toKhrushchev Gorbachev StephenJones, F. Georgian Religious “Soviet and the Policy Orthodox FromApostolic Church: 237–55. doi:10.2307/3711720. Baltics, Transcaucasia and Ukraine.” Comparisons Communists: from the under the Subcultures ———. “Religio-Nationalist 237–55. doi:10.2307/3711720. Baltics, the Transcaucasia and Ukraine.” from the Comparisons Communists: Subcultures under “Religio-Nationalist Hank. Johnston, http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/208528.pdf. 2013. DepartmentofState), (United States Labor ReligiousFreedomInternational Report for2012 1992. and Eric, Hobsbawm, Terence Ranger. 2010. BRILL, Louise. Mathilde Charlotte Hille, 31,2013.http://humanrightshouse.org/Articles/16973.html. December Accessed “Georgia StatusOrganizations.” ofReligious Law onthe a New Adopts WorkingStudies, Paper Series European, East Slavic, andEurasian Studies, Berkeley, UC Program in andPost-Soviet Soviet George Edward Sanikidze, W. Walker. in IslamicPractices Georgia.” “Islam and and Humanity Nani. “WomenGelovani, in Georgia: Trace ofIslam.” Gellner, Ernest. 536–63.doi:10.1177/1468796808088925.1, 2008): E., Miller-Idriss. Jon andFox, Cynthia Nationhood.” “Everyday Semiotics of and Drinking Drink Semiotics Journal of Pragmatics 2,no.4(July 2012). Islam and Religious TransformationIslam andReligious in Adjara Nationalism A the Georgian of ShortHistory Church: Translated from Russian of P. the Ethnos 29,no.2(February 12,2011): 22–50. 28, no. 1 (2002): 167–95.doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141107. 28,no.1(2002): ș 73, no. 3 (2008): 327–60.doi:10.1080/00141840802324011. 73,no.3(2008): ∗ . NYU Press, 1997. . NYU Press, Religion in CommunistReligion in Lands , no.25362(2004). 24, no. 4 (October 1995): 353–80.doi:10.1016/0378- 24,no.4(October 1995): State Building and Conflict Resolution in the andConflictCaucasus Resolutionin Building State Sociology ofSociology Religion Indiana Journal Law The Invention ofThe Invention Tradition Sociology of Religion of Sociology . Bloomsbury 2012. Academic, 72 Eastern Christianity and the Cold War,Eastern Christianityandthe 1945-91 . Bureau ofDemocracy,. Bureau and Human Rights International Journal ofScience Social International 54, no. 3 (September 21,1993): 54,no.3(September 84,no.2(2009). 17,no.4(January 1989): 292–312. , 2012. 54, no. 3 (September 21, 1993): 21,1993): 54,no.3(September Ethnicities . Cambridge University Press, University . Cambridge . Saunders, 1866. . Saunders, Human RightsHuman House 8, no. 4 (December 8,no.4(December Anthropology of Institute of Behind the Behind Annual . , . ,

CEU eTD Collection 64. 63. 62. 61. 60. 59. 58. 57. 56. 55. 54. 53. 52. 51. 50. 49. 48. 47. 46. 45. 44. 43. 42. www.parliament.ge/files/68_1944_951190_CONSTIT_27_12.06.pdf. of GeorgiaThe Constitution http://www.president.gov.ge/en/Georgia/Symbols. “The PresidentAdministration ofGeorgia.” ofthe Accessed April 10,2013. http://goo.gl/OHXKVQ. Selves ofMuslim Narrative vs. Georgians.”Narratives University, Maltepe 2009. Khalvashi, Tamta, “Georgian andBatiashvili. Nutsa Ideology and State Elite Identity: National 1981. Archive, Tajfel, Henri. 1986): 273.doi:10.2307/2095521.no. 2(April Swidler, in “Culture Ann. Symbols andAction: Strategies.” ———. Institution University, Hoover Press, Stanford with association 1988. Calif., Stanford, Suny, Grigor. Ronald ———. ———. Smith, Anthony D. 2002. Francis, Ideologies andPolitical Ethnicity Sheila Nationality.” Ethnicity on‘Race’, and Perspectives Feminist Allen. “Identity: In 22,2010).http://www.identitystudies.ac.ge/index.php/IStudies/article/view/10.(December Space in Georgia.” “De-Secularizing Silvia. National Serrano, officeStatistics ofGeorgia, 2003.http://goo.gl/fU7x7. of census Georgia) national 2002first ofofficial the Results mosakhleobis2002ts’lis erovnuli p’irveli Saqartvelos shedegebi aghts’eris saq’oveltan (The Georgia).” 23,2014.http://www.patriarchate.ge/?action=text/samartali05. February Accessed Opicialuri Sap’at’riarkos “Sakartvelos Veb-Gverdi (Official Web-Page of Patriarchate ofthe 196–232.doi:10.2307/2010471.(1991): Roeder, EthnicMobilization.” G. Philip and Federalism “Soviet no. 6(2011). http://magazines.russ.ru/nz%20/2011/6/pi7-pr.html. Mother Non-SovietofGeorgia).” Present Pastandofthe the Soviet Несоветское Настоящее Матери Грузии (A and Man a Woman, a Mother: and a Protector The “«Мужчина Madlen. Piltz, Женщина, И Мать»: ЗащитникИ Советское И Прошлое University of the Dissertation, 2003.http://dare.uva.nl/document/71405. Amsterdam, : Religion,Ethnicity, Georgian andin Politics the Borderlands.” Divides ———. “Uncertain doi:10.1080/1360200022000027276. of MuslimMinority Journal Affairs in State Georgia: Nation and ———. “Religion, Christian in Muslim Expansion Ajaria.” NY: Socialism.Ithaca, after and Society Culture Press, 2006. University Cornell ———. Ajaria Mathijs. Pelkmans, EurasianStudies Review Central in Post-Soviet the Red Intelligentsia “Banquets,and Florian. Grant-Eaters, Mühlfried, Mayer, Tamar. 2012. Kimberly.Marten, . Max Planck. Max Inst.forSocial Anthroplogy, 2005. The Making of the Georgian of the The Making Nation OriginsNations of The Ethnic Identity National Border: the Defending Identity, of inGeorgia the andModernity Republic Religion, Human Groups inPsychology Categories:Social andSocial Studies Gender IroniesGender Nation the Sexing of Nationalism: Warlords: Strong-Arm Brokers Weak in States Myths andMemories the NationMyths of Baptized Georgian:Baptized in ReligiousConversionto Christianity Autonomous The Making of the Georgian of the The Making Nation . University of Nevada Press,. University 1991. ofNevada

, 1995. 4,no.1(2005): 16–19. , edited by Nickie Charles and Helen Hintjens. Helen Hintjens. Charles and byNickie , edited Taylor & 22, no. 2 (2002): 249–73. 22,no.2(2002): . Wiley, 1991. 73 . Bloomington: Indiana University Press,. Bloomington:University 1994. Indiana . Oxford Press, University USA, 2000. . Indiana University Press in University . Indiana Press American Sociological Review Sociological American . Tbilisi, Georgia: National Identity Studies Identity World Politics . Taylor & Francis, 2000. . Cornell University Press, University. Cornell Press, Неприкосновенный Запас 2,no.0 43,no.02 . CUP Georgia.” Gender, 51, . ,

CEU eTD Collection 70. 69. 68. 67. 66. 65. Caucasus Zürcher, Christoph. Yuval-Davis, Nira. 2007. Religion the of Sociology of Handbook Woodhead, Differences In “Gender and Significance.” Linda. Practices Religious in New York: 1999. University Press, Columbia Verdery, Katherine. Territoryof Toft, Monica Duffy. option=com_ldmssearch&view=docView&id=28312. onThePublicService The Law . NYU Press, 2007. . Princeton University Press, 2005. University. Princeton Press, Gender andNationGender The Political Lives of Dead Bodies: Reburial andPostsocialistChange Reburial Lives of Bodies: Dead The Political The Post-Soviet Wars: in Conflict, the andNationhood Rebellion, Ethnic The Geography ofThe Geography EthnicViolence: Identity, Interests, andthe Indivisibility , 1997.https://matsne.gov.ge/index.php? . SAGE, 1997. , edited by James byJames , edited SAGE, BeckfordA. andDemerath. Jay 74 The SAGE .