Annals of Global History Volume 2, Issue 2, 2020, PP 24-29 ISSN 2642-8172

Roman-Byzantine Eagles in the Georgian Context from the Early Antiquity to the Medieval and Modern Periods

Avaliani Eka* International University, , *Corresponding Author: Avaliani Eka, International Black Sea University, Tbilisi, Georgia

ABSTRACT Recently, more than ever, the role of monuments has been imperative for scholars to shape national identity both for nationalism and memory studies. However, since the state has an influence on the society’s cultural memory, it simultaneously controls perceptions formed around and/or symbols, as well as their display as the embodiment of the national virtue. Once emerged, created, appropriated, or borrowed, national symbols and their perception take on a life of their own. The article focuses on iconic symbols of “Eagles” in the Georgian context from the early Antiquity to the Medieval and Modern periods. It explores the implication of the symbol and its functions to establish meaning in the society. The paper explains the process of interaction among meaning, , content, and receivers, as well as provides a framework to understand how historical memory can serve as a constitutive, relational, and purposive content for collective and state identities. Acknowledging that heritage is a highly political process, susceptible to the needs of power, the research draws on a number of examples to underline that the symbols of the past portrayed in various media legitimate political symbolism in fact represent political standpoint. Keywords: eagle, memory, national identity, imperial symbols, symbols of power

INTRODUCTION: A PROBLEM STATEMENT complicated values or sentiments (Turner, 1967). Inherent to visual symbols is the context The implications of material past on personal, in which they are placed and the environment by local and national cultural identity have been which they are affected (McDowell, 2008, p. fore grounded by the constructions of cultural 39).It is, therefore, important to consider the politics. Widely accepted as a selective use of ‘wide range of economic, social and political the past for contemporary purposes (Ash- relations, institutions and practices that surround worthand Graham, 2005, p.7), cultural heritage an image and through which it is seen and used’ can be seen as an aggregation of ideas, symbols, (Rose, 2001, p.17). As such, ‘visual icons are emblems and inheritances determined and defined paramount to our understanding of relationships by the needs of societies at the given time. A within local communities and their subsequent frequent focus on the relationship between past relationships with the state’ (McDowell, 2008, and present, identity is thus a vital issue in any p. 39). Forester and Johnson (2002, p.525) cultural politics (Hodder, et al., 2017, p. 238). believe that by contesting, supporting, ratifying Visual images, as iconic messages, are best or ignoring symbols, political elites and communities understood by engaging primarily with the engage with one another in a ‘symbolic dialogue’. literature addressing semiotics, the study of The author of this article considers that in a signs (Sebeok, 1991). Semiotics is an investigation wide range of political and cultural landscape, of creating and communicating the meaning. An the ‘symbolic dialogue’ may take place between iconic message is essentially supported by - local elites and the agents of foreign powers. ography, whereas hermeneutic circle encapsulates From that moment on, the symbol gains global the act of understanding or interpretation of these symbols. On the other hand, understanding meaning and understanding. is always historically located within a tradition Taking an innovative approach to study a credited with authority, construed by a recipient. symbol of an eagle in the Georgian context, we (Hodder, et al., 2017, p.238). Iconic symbols will examine: 1) why this distinct symbol was act as a shorthand, conveying and condensing adopted from the antiquity, how the meaning of

Annals of Global History V2 ● 12 ● 2020 24 Roman-Byzantine Eagles In the Georgian Context from the Early Antiquity to the Medieval and Modern Periods the image was created and later, had paramount An eagle holding a snake in the beak is represented importance on the Medieval and Modern on the intaglio ring from Dablagomi, Western iconography, and 2) how iconic meaning was Georgia. The intaglio is decorated with the communicated between artistic and ideological crescent and an olive--branch symbols modes in the last two millennia. Using a variety (Javakhishvili, 2015, p.8).The inventory of the of sources from various periods, we trace the tomb from Sairkhe was remarkable with a lot of process through which the symbol of eagle has luxury objects, among them აsome golden been appropriated, rejected, and reinterpreted in appliqués of 33 eagles were found in the same the Georgian context. grave (Makharadze & Saginashvili, 1999, p.11). IMAGES OF EAGLES IN ANTIQUITY, A bronze statue of a stag has been found in the GEORGIAN CONTEXT palace of the Roman commander-in-chief, located on the territory of the Roman garrison in An image of an eagle, as an iconic symbol, Gonio. The sculpture of an eagleis placed reappears during many centuries in the cultural between the horns of a stag(I-III cc) environment of Georgia. Visual images become (Mamuladze et al., 2017, pp.7,16).A sword with noticeable in both Western and Eastern Georgia an eagle image is found in a funerary context since the fifth century BC till the . (the graveN3), inKldeti, Western Georgia.The Eagles are represented in various compositional sword was embellished with a silver buckle, scenes. The objects are of different origins and decorated with a semi-precious gemstone. The mainly imported from foreign workshops of the powerful eagle was depicted on a large intaglio, Mediterranean and the Near Eastern countries. mounted on a plinthand holding a crown in The Golden appliqués with winged eagle from itsbeak (Lomtatidze, 1957, pp.131-133, Fig 27; the grave N11 (GNM: 10-975:71. , Western Todua, 2006, p.12). To the right of the eagle, a Georgia) dates back to 460-430 BC (The Fitzwilliam relatively small image of the goddess Nike is Museum, the Land of Golden Fleece). Apparently, depicted, while on the left side, the sign of the the clothing appliqués were attached to the Roman legion is portrayed.The eagle, as a garment of a deceased person. Slightly different symbol of the , coincided with shapes of golden eagles (GNM: 1-2005:29. an official iconographyand pointed to the high Vani, Western Georgia) found in the tomb N 24 imperial authority of its owner. This sword most are dated back to a period of 350-300 BC (The likely belonged to an elite warrior or a military Fitzwilliam Museum, the Land of Golden commander (Lomtatidze, 1957, p.131). Fleece). The signet ring with an image of an Some Italic gem-engravers preserved in the eagle was placed near there mains of a deceased Georgian State Museum (dated by I-III person in the same grave. centuries) represent an eagle in different scenes, The image of an eagle, protector of the elites the winged eagle holding a snake in its and military aristocracy was deeply entrenched talons(inv. 892 D.) (Lortkipanidze, 1967, pp.72- in the Greek and Persian iconography. Eagles 73), and the eagle holding the wheat in its talons from Vani are associated with the Achaemenid- (inv. 869. D.) ( Lortkipanidze, 1967, p.60). Colchian or Greco-Colchian styles. Another Influencedby Roman iconography, the gems figure of a winged eagle reappears in Vani with an image of an eagle was perceived as the (Western Georgia) in the late II century BC and luxurious pieces of jewelry in the Kingdom of (Shoshitashvili, 2011) has distinguishing (Bibiluri, 2019, p.73). The icon of an characteristics of the Roman imperial eagle. eagle appears in different contexts, e.g. a bronze The earliest samples of the Greek defensive eagle surrounded by Greco-Roman gods was arms found on the territory of representa found in the palace ruinsnear Dedoplis Gora bronze plate with an image of an eagle from the (Queen's Hill) (Gagoshidze, 2015, p.124), grave at the Krasnij Mayak necropolis in agilded silver bowl was excavatedin the cemetery (dated back to the first half of the 5th of Aragvispiri village (the grave N10).On the century BC)(Kvirkvelia, 2000,p. 233).An eagle bottom of the bowl a winged eagle holding a is depicted in flight with its head to the left, the crown in its beak (Ramishvili, 1975, p.12) is open wings and a tail.It is believed that the item depicted.The bowl dates back to the late Roman originates from the workshops of one of the period (III-IV centuries).Another image of an Ionian centres of the Northern Black Sea littoral eagle comes from theancient settlement (Kvirkvelia, 2000, p. 233). ofMdzoreti (Modern Kareli district) and dates

25 Annals of Global History V2 ● 12 ● 2020 Roman-Byzantine Eagles In the Georgian Context from the Early Antiquity to the Medieval and Modern Periods back to the late Antiquity. In this scene, the Georgia.Historically, the Bagratids appear in eagle clutches a rabbit in its talons (Gamqrelidze 314 reigning in Sper, modern Ispiri, whichwas et al., 2013, p.739). then a part of the Georgian principality of - (ca. 6,000 km2) withthe great castle of In the pagan religion of western Georgia, Bayberd (modern ) in the valley of the specifically in Samegrelo, the cult of an eagle Cʿoruh, innorthwestern (Toumanoff, appears in legends and folktales.On the site of Bagratids). The Kingdom of covered the present , there used to be a the of Samtskhe-, Kola-Artaani, big oak tree (Didi chkoni - chkondidi). The Shavsheti, Tao-Klarjeti, Basiani, and Tortomi figure of a man made of cast-iron (orof copper) (Tortumi). Starting from the 6th century, Grand was arracted nearby. This idol was called of and subsequently, the kings of Kapunia/Rokapunia, or Didgimiri/Dodgimiri. the Georgians were bestowed with honorable People believed it to bean eagle-man, whohad titles of Magistros, Hypatos, Patrikios, Curopalates, its nest in Chkondidi (Mashurko,1894, pp.376- Nobelissimus, and (e.g. Ashot I, Bagrat 377; Ghambashidze, 2017, p.21; Eliava, 1962, I, I, Adarnase IV, David III, Bagrat III, p. 15). Bagrat IV etc.).Conferring titles upon Georgian Exploring iconography and symbolic meaning kings was the prerogative of the Byzantine widely spread in the ancient Mediterranean and (Avaliani, 2019). Near Eastern cultures, one can consider that an The Byzantine imperial model, with its vital eagle was a symbol of power,patronage, and religious and cultural appurtenances — by superiority, as well as the emblem of military means of style, patterns, standards, and symbols and state institutions. Based on the afore- - laid the foundation to the recreation of the mentioned archaeological data and historical Georgian “nation-state” with the early forms of sources, it can be assumed that the image of an “Christian Orthodox Nationalism.” Georgian eagle appears on the territory of Georgia from “Christian Orthodox Nationalism” rose from the the Ancient times.While studying visual images womb of the Empire and adopted Byzantine and the context, one may conclude that these traditions, doctrines, and symbols of power. iconic messages define ideological, social and Creation of a new state model first needed aesthetic aspects of ancient Georgian elite political attestation, and afterwards, the society and can be perceived as an expression of affirmation of the legitimacy of power via “outward projection” of imperial images. . Subsequently, the “transmitted BYZANTINE SYMBOLS OF POWER IN power” through the symbolic and iconic images PERIPHERY was submitted to Bagratids of Tao. Byzantine symbolism (in the Middle Byzantine period After a complete religious metropolitanization 843–1204) resembled on the one hand Roman of the ByzantineEmpire (in the Middle Byzantine imperial images, but on the other hand, period), Constantinople had abundant resources resynthesized them into completely new forms to disperse and thus establish new neighboring and iconic images. Autopoiesis in state satellites in the southwest districts of (the motion of self-creation and the self- Tao/‛, Klarjet‛i/Kłarjk‛,and Shavshet‛i/ representation) embodied religious and political Shawshēt‛. Soon after reinforcing religious perceptions of the superiority. The embodied interconnection with Constantinople, the Empire symbols of Christian political power were fostered another type of dependency — a handed over to those political entities and states, political one. This was entirely consistent with which were considered in the area of the the imperial principles of recognition of “imperial affiliation”. The self-visualization and Christian statehood by the “Byzantinizing” auto reference of imperium can be analyzed Georgian Bagratids in southwest districts of through the transformation of the symbol of an Tao/Tayk‛, Klarjet‛i/Kłarjk‛, and Shavshet‛i/ eagle. Shawshēt‛. A single headed Roman imperial eagle was Georgian Bagratids were the most important continuously used in Byzantium, (e.g. Early princely ofCaucasia, maintainingthe Byzantine eagle, north of the Golden Gate in royal status from the ninth till the nineteenth Constantinople 412–414, 6th century Byzantine century in Georgia. Bagrationi of Tao-Klarjeti Roman of an eagle catching a snake, founded the “Kingdom of Georgians” (Kartvelta from the peristyle of the Great Palace from the Samepo) in the ninth century in thesouthwest of reign of , the key stone has

Annals of Global History V2 ● 12 ● 2020 26 Roman-Byzantine Eagles In the Georgian Context from the Early Antiquity to the Medieval and Modern Periods an open-winged, single-headed eagle looking political model responding to imperial challenges, towards East, from Church in and acceleration of interdependence on the etc.) (Avaliani, 2019, p.156). imperial metropolis proves Georgia’s affiliation with a . In the early and late , the symbols, such as an eagle attacking a snake with its beak THE EXTENSION OF MEMORY: EAGLES, (Wittkower, 1939), as well as an eagle with a SYMBOL OF IDENTITY AND POWER DURING small mammal, or bird in its claws (or eagle THE REIGN OF EREKLE II standing frontally with its wings outspread) became common themes for the Byzantine An eagle as a symbol of power reappears during visual art (Maguire,1992, p.286). The combination the reign of Erekle II, the Georgian monarch of of a cross and an eagle on an imperial royal the (the King of Kartli and scepter existed as early as in the sixth century. from 1762 until 1798). Erekle II placed Eagle-topped scepters were a frequent feature of his kingdom under the formal Russian protection. consular diptychs, and appear on coins until the As a result of the in 1783, reign of Philippikos Bardanes (r. 711–713) the Georgian King finally obtained the guarantees (Cutler, 1991, p.669). he had sought from , transforming Georgia into a Russian . Erekle II Bagrationi of Tao-Klarjeti founded and formally repudiated all legal ties to Persia and Khakhuli Monasteries in the historical Tao placed his foreign policy under the Russian province. Oshki was built between 963 and 973. imperial control. Political relationships with The monastery is located in , in the replicated on the Georgian village of Çamlıyamaç, in northeastern royal iconography, in 1781, 1787, 1789 years Province, bordering Province. Khakhuli Monastery was founded in the second half of the with a double-headed eagle appearing on royal 10th century by King David III Kurapalates. copper coins. During the , Erekle II’s name Oshki’s eagle is depicted with a mammal was placed in full in Asomtavruli: ႨႰႠႩႪႨ (though sometimes perceived as a calf, a lamb (IRAKLI) and the image used was a double- or a sheep) in its talons. Khakhuli’s eagle is headed eagle (Paghava, 2017, p.253). The depicted with half-open wings, holding a deer in double-headed eagle, on the one hand, indicated its claws (Беридзе, 1981, p. 292, pls. 59-61, the bonds with the Byzantine, and, on the other 118; Djobadze, 1986, pp.81-100). hand, demonstrated ties with the Russian Empire. The appropriation of the symbol of Byzantine The date of the first introduction of a double- Empire between two historical actors, the Russians headed eagle in the Byzantine Empire has been and the Georgians, claiming their inheritance, much discussed. It was certainly employed by members of the Palaiologan dynasty, perhaps to visibly demonstrates how and why they show that the empire looked both towards the esteemed and valued legacies of the Christian West and the East (The Oxford Dictionary of Empire and how they were able to claim the Byzantium, 1991, p.669). This symbol was not inheritance to which they were entitled to. appropriated by Georgian Bagratids, while in However, during the Russo-Turkish War (1787– Russia, a double-headed eagle appeared from 1792), a Tbilisi-based small Russian force the time of Grand Ivan III in 1497, when evacuated from Georgia, leaving Erekle II alone Ivan married a Byzantine princess, Sophia to face new threats from Persia. In 1795, Agha Palaiologina. Mohammad Khan demanded Erekle II to The political formation of the Georgian acknowledge Persian . However, the Georgian King refused, and in September 1795, statehood, including its governing institutions, the Persian army of 35,000 moved into Georgia. royal titles, and symbols of power can be After a valiant defense of Tbilisi at the Battle of perceived as an expression of a direct “export” Krtsanisi, Erekle’s small army was completely of imperial images and institutions. defeated. Tbilisi was sacked. Despite being Understanding a symbol of national identity can betrayed by the Russian empress, the Georgian help us to better understand national orientations King still relied on a belated Russian support. In and political actions. Referring to Georgian 1796, Empress Catherine II directed the Russian kings in a Byzantine manner, allocation of expeditionary forces into the Persian territories, Byzantine symbols of power, readiness to but her successor Paul I again withdrew all reconstitute Georgian politics as a new united Russian troops from the . Mohammad

27 Annals of Global History V2 ● 12 ● 2020 Roman-Byzantine Eagles In the Georgian Context from the Early Antiquity to the Medieval and Modern Periods

Khan launched his second campaign to punish Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium Georgians for their alliance with Russia. “Days of Justinian I”, Ohrid, Resen, 23-24 November, 2018, Mitko B. Panov(Ed.) Skopje, Since 1796, the images of a double-headed 142-161. eagle disappeared from the Georgian coins. The [3] Беридзе, В. (1981). АрхитектураТао- images of a double-headed eagle were replaced Кларджети.Тбилиси, Мецниереба. with a single-headed Roman-Byzantine imperial [4] Bibiluri, T. (2019). Romauliimportikartlis (iberiis) eagle. Since 1796 we have copper coins of sameposhi, onlainarkeologia, 15, 63-86. [Biblical, Erekle II with the effigy of an eagle produced at T. (2019). Roman Imports in the Kingdom of Tbilisi mint. The King also produced gold coins Kartli (Iberia), Online Archeology, 15, 7 63-86]. with the effigy of an eagle, two samples of [5] Online English-Georgian Catalogue of which are maintained in Hermitage, Saint- Georgian . Copper Coins of Erekle Petersburg (Online English-Georgian Catalogue II with the Effigy of Eaglehttp://geonumismat of Georgian Numismatics, Copper Coins of ics.tsu.ge/en/catalogue/types/?type=115 Erekle II with the Effigy of Eagle).According to [6] National . Coin. https:// Yevgeniy Pakhomov’s (Пахомов,1970),the www.nbg.gov.ge/index.php?m=194&lng=eng change of the imagery, specifically the reduction [7] Cutler, A. (1991). Eagles. The Oxford Dictionary of the number of the eagle-heads, was inspired of Byzantium. Alexander Kazhdan (Ed.) Oxford by the alteration of the weight standard and the and New York: Oxford University Press. desire to make new coins easily distinguishable [8] Djobadze, W. (1986). Observations on the from the previous batch. However, the author Architectural Sculpture of Tao-Klarjet’i Churches of this paper presumes that change and around One Thousand A. D., Studienzurspäta alteration of the symbols exclusively coincide ntiken und byzantinischen Kunst: Friedrich with the political views of the Georgian King Wilhelm Deichmanngewidmet. Teil 2, herausge and reflect his sharp disagreements regarding geben in Verbindungmit Otto Feld und Russian imperial policy. The single-headed UrsPeschlow 10/2.Bonn: R. Habelt, 81-100. image of an eagle contains Roman-Byzantine [9] Eliava, G. (1962), Chkondidi-Marviliistoriu elements, which shows a spiritual and direct limimoxilva, [Chkondidi-Martvili Historical succession to the Byzantine Empire. Review], Tbilisi:Tsodna. CONCLUSION [10] Forester, B., Johnson, J. (2002). Unravelling the Threads of History: Soviet Era Monuments Political elites reinvent signs and symbols and and Post-Soviet National Identity in Moscow. impose them in different contexts, adapting their Annals of the Association of American reference and meaning accordingly to the Geographers, 91, 524–47. political and cultural circumstances. As such, [11] The Fitzwilliam Museum. From the Land of they articulate heritage, and symbols can be Golden Fleece, Tomb Treasures of Ancient perceived as the icons of the national identity. Georgia. https://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/ On August 10, 2000 Georgian bi-metallic 10- gallery/goldenfleece/explore/graves.html Lari coin were put into circulation to [12] Gagoshidze, I. (2015). 2013-2015 tslisgatkhre commemorate the 3,000th anniversary of the bidedoplisgoraze, iberia-kolkheti, 11, Tbilisi. Georgian statehood. The coin depicts features 119-140 [Gagoshidze, I. (2015).2013-2015 bas-reliefs of an eagle and a lion from the 11th Excavations on Queen's Hill, Iberia-Kolkheti, century (denoting the 11, Tbilisi, 119-140]. strength of the state). The composition is [13] Gamqrelidze, G., Mindorashvili, D., Bragvadze, finalized by a leaf ornament and seven stars. Z., M. Kvachadze. (2013). Kartlistskhovrebisto The coin is circled with a legend that reads, in poarkeologiurileksikni. Tbilisi:bakursulakauris Georgian,” 3,000th anniversary of Georgian gamomvemloba.[Gamkrelidze,G., Mindora statehood” (, Coins). shvili, D., Bragvadze, Z., Kvachadze M.(2013). Topoarchaeological Dictionary of Kartli’sLife. REFERENCES Tbilisi:BakurSulakauri]. [1] Ashworth, G.J. and Graham, B. (Eds.) (2005). [14] Ghambashidze, N. (2017). Christianization of Senses of Place: Senses of Time. Aldershot: Georgia in Georgian Folklore and Religious Ashgate. Beliefs.Interdisciplinarity of Religious Studies: [2] Avaliani, E. (2019). Byzantine Imperial Interaction of Culture, History, Religion. Affiliation, Allocation of Symbols of Power Warsaw: IRF Press. and Royal Titles in Periphery (in Early Middle [15] Hodder, I., Shanks, M., Alexandri, A., Buchli, V., and High Middle Ages). State and Empire, Carman, J., Last J., Lucas G. (2017).

Annals of Global History V2 ● 12 ● 2020 28 Roman-Byzantine Eagles In the Georgian Context from the Early Antiquity to the Medieval and Modern Periods

Interpreting Archaeology: Finding Meaning in ApsarosArchaeological-Architectural Museum- the Past. New York and London: Routledge. Reserve, ]. [16] Javakhishvili, K. (2015). Sakartvelosglip [25] Машурко, М. (1894).Предания основания tikuridzeglebi, iberia-kolkheti, 11, Tbilisi. 5-37 Мартвильского монастыря,Сборник материалов [Javakhishvili,K. (2015). Georgian Glyptic по описанию местностей и племен Monuments. Iberia-Kolkheti, 11, Tbilisi, 5-37]. Кавказа,18, III. [17] Kvirkvelia, G. (2000). Hoplite Amour in [26] The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, (1991). Colchis. Phasis 2-3, 232-241. Alexander P. Kazhdan (Ed.,), Vol 1-2-3, New [18] Lomtatidze, G. (1957). Kldeetissamarovani, Tbilisi. York, Oxford, Oxford University Press [G. Lomtatidze, (1957). Kldeeti Cemetery, Tbilisi]. [27] Paghava, I. (2017). Profitability of Minting Civic Copper Coins and the Identification of [19] Lortkipanidze, M. (1967). Sakartvelossakhel Emerging Nationalism as Seen through Coin mtsipomuzeumisgemebi, IV, Tbilisi. [M. Imagery, A Case Study of the East-Georgian Lortkipanidze, (1967). Gems of the Georgian Kingdom Kartl-Kakheti. Faghfoury, Mostafa, State Museum, IV, Tbilisi]. ed. Iranian Numismatic Studies. A Volume in [20] Lortkipanidze, M. (1954). Sakartvelossakhe Honor of Stephen Album. Hardbound. Lancaster. lmtsipomuzeumisgemebi, samtavrossamaro 243-255. vanshimo-povebuligemebiskatalogi, I, Tbilisi. [28] Пахомов, Е. (1970). МонетыГрузии. Тбилиси. [Lortkipanidze,M. (1954). Gems of the Georgian [29] Rose, G. (2001). Visual Methodologies: An State Museum, Catalog of Gems from the Introduction to the Interpretation of Visual Samtavro Cemetery, I, Tbilisi]. Materials. London: Sage. [21] Maguire, H. (1992). An Early Christian Marble [30] Ramishvili, R. (1975). Akhaliarkeologiuriagh Relief at Kavala. ΔελτίοντηςΧριστιανικής mochenebiaragviskheobashi, dzeglismegobari, Αρχαιολογικής Εταιρείας [Διαδικτυακά] 16. 39, Tbilisi, 7-15. [Ramishvili,R. (1975). New ΑΘΗΝΑ, 283-95. Archaeological Discoveries in the Valley, [22] Makharadze, G., Saginashvili, M., (1999). An Friend of the Monument, N39, Tbilisi, 7-15]. Achaemenian Glass Bowl from Sairkhe, [31] Sebeok, T. (1991). Signs: An Introduction to Georgia. Journal of Glass Studies, 41 11. 11-17 Semiotics. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. [23] McDowell, S. (2008). Heritage, memory and [32] Shoshitashvili, N. (2011). Vani - “okrostsvimis” identity. Graham, B., Howard, P. (Eds.), The kalaki. Istoriani 3. [Shoshitashvili, N.(2011). Ashgate Research Companion to Heritage and Vani - the city of "Golden Rain".Historian, 3]. Identity. Ashgate: Aldershot, UK. 37–53. [33] Turner, V. (1967).The Forest of Symbols. [24] Mamuladze, Sh., Shalikadze,T., Stsipiorski, Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. R.K., Kamadadze, K., Mamuladze, S. (2017). [34] Todua, T. (2006). Romaulipalerakldeetidan, 2017 tselsgonio-apsarosistsikhisteritoriazetsa Amirani, XIV-XV, 12-20. [T. Todua,(2006). rmoebuliarkeologiuriekspeditsiisangarishi.ach Roman Palera from the Kldeti, Amirani, XIV- ariskulturulimem kvidreobisdatsvissaagentogo XV, 12-20]. nio-apsarosisarkeologiur-arkitekturulimuzeum- nakrdzali. Batumi. [Mamul adze, Sh., [35] Toumanoff, C. EncyclopædiaIranica, “Bagratids,” Shalikadze, T., Scipiorsky, R.K., Kamadadze, http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/bagratids- K., Mamuladze, S.(2017). Report of the dynasty Archaeological Expedition on the Territory of [36] Wittkower, R. (1939). Eagle and Serpent: A Gonio-Apsaros Fortress in 2017, Study in the Migration of Symbols. Journal of Cultural Heritage Protection Agency Gonio- the Warburg Institute, 2/4, 293-325.

Citation: Avaliani Eka, “Roman-Byzantine Eagles In the Georgian Context from the Early Antiquity to the Medieval and Modern Periods”, Annals of Global History, 2(2), 2020, pp. 24-29. Copyright: © 2020 Avaliani Eka. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

29 Annals of Global History V2 ● 12 ● 2020