english version

Vazha Kiknadze: Report of the Mission to Japan

The International symposium was held in 20-21 April in Senda, at the Tohoku University, which is the third among Japanese universities with its importance.  The symposium theme was “the new evaluations of the history”. The conference took place in the “Centre of study of the northern-eastern Asia” (CNES) at Tohoku University. The conference put together representatives from Azerbaijan, the Middle East, Mongolia and from so-called Sakha Republic (Iakutia, the Russian Federation). Georgia was presented by me already for the second time

The purpose of the symposium was a re-evaluation of soviet historiography appraisals and methodology. This was the main task of the symposium and all representatives tried to show it with the concrete material and by an example of their own countries.

My report was about the 1924-year rebellion and its evaluation in the soviet and post-soviet historiography. I presented this report in English, which was interpreted simultaneously into the Japanese language.

After a short historical introduction (reporters had 15 minutes, a translator also had 15 min.), I admitted that this theme started to avoid the soviet stereotypes only in 90-s of XX century. Several works were published on this theme and at the same time, archives of the soviet Security Committee, which were closed before, became accessible and works about this issue started to publish.  Should be noted significant works of N. Kirtadze (Kutaisi, 1996; Tbilisi, 1999.) Later, the 1924 rebellion was researched by G. Tsitsishvili, Al. Daushvili, K. Tsenguashvili, D. Shvelidze and others. Some interesting documents on this issue were published by G. Gelashvili (Tbilisi, 2000) and O. Janelidze (Tbilisi, 1999).

I noted at the symposium that in spite of serious changes, several issues are not studied properly yet. The 1924-year rebellion is not researched completely; no one has compared the rebellion to the similar incidents in Georgia or internationally by the new methodology. Besides, while evaluating this incident, in post-soviet historiography one can observe wrong and often, not national appraisals (for example, the rebellion was inspired by the Soviet security organs from the beginning and also heads of rebellion should not be radicals and think about compromises (?!) and so on.).

It was underlined in the report that 1924-year rebellion needs further research, analyzes and re-evaluation of old and wrong appraisals.   

At the summing meeting of the symposium the Japanese side asked, how is the relation of an each post-soviet country to Russia and what they await. My response was that Georgia has significant but unfortunately, negative experience in this case. From the example of our country, can be concluded that Russia (Monarchic, Soviet and Post-soviet) never took responsibility to defend signed international agreements and on they contrary, it was used as the platform for the further aggression.

These my appraisals were accepted without any comment from the Japanese side, but nobody expressed opposite opinions also.

With words of the international meeting organizers, a symposium was a success and the Centre of study of the northern-eastern Asia at Tohoku University will continue its collaboration with colleagues in future too. I also want to note with gratitude that all expanses: flight from Georgia to Sendai and my one-week stay there, were covered by the Japanese side. Hosts tried their best to show me Sendai, resort place Macushima and Tokyo.

I suppose that relation between our countries will get more intensive and close in future. To my doubt, the links too.

A card of the symposium participation

The director of LEPL Iv. Javakhishvili History and Ethnology Institute, The full Professor of  Tbilisi State University,

The Humanitarian Sciences faculty , the History direction

Vazha Kiknadze

May 17, 2010 Posted by | Mission reports | Leave a comment

Studies in Modern and Contemporary History 1(7), [Tbilisi, 2010]


Gia Gelashvili

Shota Vadackoria

Vasil Kacharava

Vazha Kiknadze

Wojciech Materski


of sciences of Poland)

Gela Saitidze

(Deputy editor)

Malkhaz Sioridze

Avtandil Songulashvili


Khatuna Kokrashvili

(Executive secretary)

Dodo Chumburidze

(Deputy editor)

Niko Javakhishvili




P l a t o n J o s e l i a n i – 2 0 0

Gela Saitidze

Platon Ioseliani – Editor, Publicist


The ten years were the most fruitful among Platon Ioseliani’s (1809 –

1875) many-sided activity. They were the years when he was the editor of

“Kavkazski Vestnik” (“The Messenger of the Caucasus”). The many-sided

manifestation of his talent, great successes in science, elucidation, editorial,

publicistic activity was also promoted by his close relations with count

Mikhail Voroncov, the main ruler of the Caucasus. The count was a person

with the help of whom Platon Ioseliani could manage to use the official

newspaper issued in Russian language for revealing and displaying Georgian

history, church, culture and national traditions. Grateful posterity always will

remember his wise suggestion full of patriotism: “Live with the history and

heroic deeds of the fatherland. There is not a life without history”.


Khatuna Kokrashvili

Platon Ioseliani – The Researcher of the Church History (General review)


The Church history studies carried on by Platon Ioseliani is an

extremely interesting sphere of his creative activity. While studying in the

Theological Academy of Petersburg he compiled short history of Georgia in

Russian. After corresponding revision and improvement the book was edited

in 1843. This is the first work that studies the Church history of Georgia

monographically. The book was highly evaluated by author’s contemporaries.

It does not lose its significance even now.

Platon Ioseliani has described not a single Georgian church, monastery,

cathedral. Such as: Svetitskhoveli, Nokorno, Shiomghvime, Gelati, Kabeni,

Ikorta. These works give an obvious picture of the condition of those days

Georgian churches and monasteries; they give and provide us with important

data about the relics, manuscripts or books preserved there; they preserve an

information about the history of this or that church and monastery and about

their condition at that very time.

Platon Ioseliani‘s journey to Mount Athos is worth to be mentioned.

He described the current state of those days Monastery of Georgians on the

Holy Mountain; compiled a list of manuscripts that were available for him

among there preserved ones; brought in Georgia some of them for temporary

use. Among these manuscripts there was a Bible copped in Oshki Monastery

for the Monastery of Athos. Platon Ioseliani was a scientist who directed his

attention on the importance of Biblical studies. On the basis of available

sources he edited the «Lifes» of Georgian Saints who were canonized by the

Church of Georgia.

The evaluation of the history of the Church of Georgia on the

background of the Near East Christian Church history, bringing foreign

historical sources and data into scientific circulation together with Georgian

ones and their critical comprehension is the merit of Palton Ioseliani. It really

was a kind of novelty for those days Georgian historical thinking. Thus, we

may say that scientific studies of the church history in Georgian

historiography originate from Platon Ioseliani’s works.

The History of the Georgian

Dodo Chumburidze

Russian Colonialization in Abkhazia and the Settlement Parnauti


From the second half of the 19th century the imperial government of

Russia started to colonize the historical territories of Georgia. Abkhazian and

Russian scientists evaluate this process totally distorted. According to their

viewpoint at that very period Abkhazia was captured by Georgia that caused

demographical changes in this region (Dzidzaria, Lakoba, Bghazhba). In fact

Russia founded 35 Russian and other Russified nations’ villages in Abkhazia.

Georgians were drawn out and were announced beyond the colonization


The history of the village Parnauta reveals the real aims of the Russian

colonialization. Its extremely chauvinistic nature became even the subject of

the discussion of the Russian press. The Russian press was mentioning that

the Russian government was unfair to drive out the native Georgian

population from this village. The publication describes how the natives of the

village Parnauta were fighting to defend their rites. The publication also

shows the attitude of the Russian government towards the common process of

the colonialization of Abkhazia.

Tsatsa Chkhartishvili

Theatrical Life in Abkhazia in the 80-90es of the 19th Century


In the 80-90es of the 19th century in Abkhazia, when Tsarism was

carrying out the strictest policy, when even writing and reading in Georgian

language was forbidden, it is easy to imagine the importance of theater.

Theatre played the greatest role in deepening the national mentality of masses

and preserving spiritual strength. Since the 80-90es of the 19th century in

many places in Abkhazia (Sokhumi, Ochamchire, Okumi, Gudauta, Gali etc)

the performances of the amateur theater lovers’ were held.

Since 1911 the theater became half professional and in 1928

professional. Abkhazian song, which from time immemorial was

concommited the life of Abkhazian, was the first that set foot on the stage and

with the help of performing different types of folk art gave the theatre of

Abkhazia the perspective of development, the outstanding representative of

which was Jana Achba.

Otar Gogolishvili

Historian Evgeni Veidenbaum’s Writings about Adjara


Some of the scientific researches of Evgeni Veidenbaum are dedicated to

adjara. Some of these researches are included into the book «essays about

Caucasus». It is worth mentioning the essay «from Batumi to Artvin». This

essay was publishes in 1878 in the newspaper «Caucasus». Very interesting

information about Adjara was published in a very important scientific

research «the guideline to Caucasus for the 1888 year». On October 31, 1878

Evgeni Veidenbaum returned to the town of Batumi by the ship «Rioni».


Ilia Vadachkoria

The Newspaper “Iveria” About the Sources of the History of Georgia and

Published Scientific Literature (1886 – 1889)


The study of the newspaper “Iveria” from the point of view of the

history of Georgia and published scientific literature showed that: 1) The

newly revealed sources of the history of Georgia and scientific literature

published in the newspaper “Iveria” are the publications heaving a character

of a review. They served to draw an attention of the readers and the

researchers of the history of Georgia to the mentioned items. 2) On the

background of the significant facts and events the newspaper “Iveria” aimed

the popularization of the deeds of the prominent historical figures to

strengthen the national identity and the revival of the honor towards the past.

Ketevan Mania

The Process of National Identity Hardening According to «Iveria» (1887)


The study of the national identity development based on the example of

the detailed analysis of some issues of «Iveria» published in1887 is given in

the research.

There are many works dedicated to the research of Georgian unity and

consolidation processes in scientific literature. The prior subjects of

discussions in these researches were the objective factors. Subjective factors

were beyond the frames of the scientific interest before. The analysis of the

historical sources from the mentioned point of view occurred on the example

of hagiographic sources only in resent studies (M. Chkhartishvili).

The given work is an attempt to fill up somehow the blanks. The work

is focused on analyzing the subjective factors of the national consolidation

process. With the help of elucidating how the publications of «Iveria» were

perceived by readers we can state how they experience the Georgian unity

from one side and from the other, what is the role of press from the point of

view of unity of Georgian identity.

After the analysis of the publications it becomes clear that there are

some important items for the process of national consolidation: the necessity

of development of public culture, from the point of view of spreading

education among the population, as well as strengthening the inner impulses

of the unity; creation of common economics as an obligatory and inevitable

condition for unity existence; taking care of preserving and saving national

history and traditions, showing the historical role and importance of the

Georgian unity to the current society. The activities towards solving these

problems, the main field for which was «Iveria» as a press media, had

obviously the function of strengthening and stabilizing the sentiments within

the inner groups of Georgian unity.

Thus, on the basis of above discussed materials it can be designated that the

national consolidation was marked with the creation of cultural, economics

and social unity.

Nato Songulashvili

Identical Autonumous Ideal: the Idea of Freedom and its Cultivation on the

Basis of Printing Media in the 10-years Georgian Unity of XX century


The ideal of freedom is one of the main parts of collectiv cultural

identity. In the research workthere is studied the Georgian identical

autonomous ideal, the idea of freedom and its cultivation in Georgian unity in

1918-1921, on the basis of publications newspaper, „Georgia.»

among the Georgian we-group members the ring-leader for

propaganda-actualization of freedom ideal was cultural and politikal elite.


Irina Arabidze

Additional Information About Ekvtime Takaishvili’s Expedition in 1917


In 1917 under the guidance of Ekvtime Takaishvili and on behalf of

The Historical and Ethnographical Society of Georgia the expedition in Tao-

Tortum-Ispir was held. During the World War I (1914-1918), in summer

1917, this territory was liberated from Osmans’ rule. It was a chance for

Georgian society to take care and restore old church centres.

The contribution of The Provisional Government of The Church of

Georgia in organizing the expedition was not mentioned in the scientific

literature. Only the information about donation of the expedition by Georgian

clergy was known.

From the records of proceedings of The Georgian Church Provisional

Government it becomes clear that planning of the expedition was on the

initiative of the ruling organ of The Church of Georgia. In July 4, at the

session of the provisional government the letter – report of Khakhuli

commandant lieutenant N. Shugurov about the state of Kakhuli monastery

was discussed. The session passed a resolution to send an expedition to

become aware and learn the needs of the monastery.

The members of the provisional government with one voice asked the

great Georgian scientist-archeologist Ekvtime Takaishvili to organize and

choose the members for the expedition.

From the records of the proceeding and letters of Ekvtime Takaishvili

and Niko Mari it can be stated that the expedition started in August 8. The

mentioned date is wrongly indicated in the publications (E. Takaishvili, The

Archeological Expedition in 1917 in the South Provinces of Georgia,

publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of Georgian SSR, Tbilisi, 1952,

in Russian and in its Georgian translation published in Tbilisi, 1960 by the

same publishing house) about the expedition.

The results of the expedition had not become the subject of discussion

at the sessions of the provisional government. When the expedition was

ended, in September 18, the Church of Georgia was ruled not by provisional

organ but by the Catholicos-Patriarch and the council of catholicos.

Lela Saralidze

From the History of So Called «South Osetia» Autonomous Oblast

Formation in 1917 – 1922


On the basis of the scientific analysis of the archive materials the history

of so called «South Osetia» formation on the ancient territory of Georgia

is shown in the work. On the basis of the historical documents it is also shown

that the separative movement of Osetians in Georgia started already in 1905

and became active in 1917. The demands of Osetians that were gradually rising

and their pretensions on different stages are also shown in the work.

It is underscored that the term «South Osetia» is completely artificial

from the historical viewpoint and thus unacceptable, because the term means

that the historical Georgian territory – «Shida Kartli» (inner Kartli) is populated

with Osetians. On the basis of the public commissariat conclusion of the

Soviet Georgia Ministry of Internal Affairs, that was kept in strict secret by

those days Communist regime, the groundlessness of so called «South Osetia»

formation is shown as well. After thorough investigation the lawyer, public

commissioner of those days internal affairs, Besarion Kvirkvelia in conclusion

says that it is impossible to give Osetians rite to have not only autonomy,

but even the administrative unit of okrug. In September 27, 1921 the public

commissariat of the Soviet Georgia Ministry of Internal Affairs after Besarion

Kvirkvelia’s instruction sent a memorandum report about separation of so

called «South Osetia» as independent administrative unit to the business manager

of the Revolutionary Committee of the Soviet Georgia. Besarion Kvirkvelia

was asking him to put the memorandum report forward for discussion at

the meeting of the Revolutionary Committee. The report was rejected and

Besarion Kvirkvelia was demoted. He was appointed as the military marine

commissioner to deliver him from mentioned processes. According to one

archive document he even was deported from Georgia in 1922 and lately, in

1937, in the period of repressions, was shot. The fact that according to the

decree № 2 of the Soviet Georgia Central Executive Committee and Public

Commissars Committee signed by Filipe Makharadze and Sergo Kavtaradze

dated to April 20, 1922 the formation of so called «South Osetia» oblast

within the boarders of the Soviet Georgia was illegal. This was an illegal decision

which was totally dining the interests of the native inhabitants-

Georgian population.

Shota Vadachkoria

Exile Policy of the Shida Kartli Osetians Living in the Mountains and Georgian

Political Thinking (The 20es of the 20th century)


On the basis of the documental material it is stated that: 1) The Georgian

government carried on several positive activities towards the Osetians.

The government gave the Osetians: lands, wood, pastures, founded Osetian

schools. In 1918 – 1920 the Osetians in their turn replied to these positive

steps of the government with “inland crusade campaigns” towards the independent

republic. The leaders of the Georgian political thinking saw that the

Osetians became the adjunct spongers of the country. After the sound analyses

of the Osetians’ deeds the political spectrum of Georgia put forward legal

questions: Why the Osetians hated Georgians so much? Did the Osetians

deserve to live together with Georgians? When Georgians were undergoing

the difficulties four rebellions of the Osetians and the attempt of weakening

the Georgian state drove the Georgian political elite to acknowledge that their

positive step was a mistake. The radical declaration of the National – Democratic

Party on this background was completely logical. They declared: “The

Osetians are fatal pimple on the body of Georgia and we by all means must

get rid of it”. 2) The decision to free gorges of the Roki and Mamisoni passes

from the Osetian population and resettle there Georgian population and put

this issue forward was determined by untrustworthiness of the Osetians. In

this case we must take into consideration the facts of four rebellions ordered

and donated in 1918 – 1920 by Soviet intelligent service for destroying the

Georgian government. For neutralization of the Osetian threat and for the

elementary conditions of living peacefully the representatives of the Georgian

political thinking believed the one of the ways out of this difficult situation

was to make an example of punishing the Osetians and put them in the service

of the Georgian state. 3) The exile policy of the Osetians carried on by

the government of the independent Georgia served to oppose with dignity the

expecting attack from the Soviet Russia, to move its adherent Osetian population

living at the border line from this region and thus have the guarantees.

After throwing doubts on the independence of the Georgian state, there was

not another alternative left for the government of Georgia. Radical activities

carried on by the government influenced those part of the Osetian population,

who committed actions equal to betrayal. On the second hand, the exile policy

was one of the parts of the country’s agrarian reform which aimed to use

together with Georgians the labor of the Osetians in purpose.

Nugzar Zosidze

Batumi District in the First Part of year 1920


In the beginning of 1920, one of the actual subjects of Batumi district

political life was working on it’s administrative suitment. Remarkable is, that

from the start there was no common opinion among local national forces, for

example Haidar and Zia abashidze were thinking that inside Georgia,

Georgian Autonomy was not necessary, but the more numereous part was

thinking otherwise.

The appealing of idea of Georgia’s regions autonomy was conditioned

by Antanta countries’ Caucasian politics, which very often came to

contradiction in this Region. We may also say, that as locally, so in the central

government, they had blur impression of governing form of autonomy as in

Region’s administrative suitment. We would also add, that region’s

administrative suitment’s autonomous form was not an ideal version.

Comeback to the motherland in the region became significantly active

in 1920 year’s early spring. This was challanged by escalation of Batumi

subject on international arena.

In the conclusion we may say, that the fight for bringing Batumi district

back was uncompormising, that was bringing nationally and teritorially

divided Georgia back together.

Nino Ghambashidze

Vakhtang Ghambashidze – The Life and Activity


Vakhtang Ghambashidze (1872 – 1951) was born in Zestaphoni in the

family of prominent church and public figure archpriest Davit Ghambashidze.

People called him «the great archpriest». He was the editor of the famous religious

magazine «The Shepherd» publishing not only about the problems of

the Church of Georgia but about the burning issues of the secular life of the

country as well.

Vakhtang Ghambashidze studied at a preliminary school in Kutaisi and

finished a grammar school of Tbilisi. After graduating the medical faculty of

the Moscow University he continued his qualification in France. In 1898,

after retuning back to Georgia, from the very beginning was involved in

medical practice as a village doctor. Those days Georgian press was writing

about his sensitiveness, devotion in helping poor village people whom he was

often treated free of charge.

As soon as he arrived in Georgia he started to fulfill his desire of

establishing sanatorium mostly for children with lung and breathing system

difficulties. Before establishing the sanatorium he had written several

publications for medical education of the population. In his publications he

was explaining the readers how to prevent tuberculoses, what it means, how

should seminaries and schools with the help of prophylactics avoid illness;

how and what to eat, how to feed a baby.

Before establishing his sanatorium he was on business tour in Leysin,

in Switzerland where he studied the experience of current achievements of

curortology and based on these achievements in 1904 he founded the

sanatorium for children in Patara Tsemi. The sanatorium was famous and

beloved place for rest and recover all over Georgia. It also was known beyond

the boarders of the Caucasus. Vakhtang Ghambashidze was carrying on the

studies and experiments in his, for those days modern sanatorium. In his

scientific work he was co-laborating with the well known French physicians:

Alphonse Laveran and Alfred Binet who paid a great attention to his work.

In 1921 when Bolsheviks’ occupied Georgia he with his family had to

leave the mother land hoping that one day he would return back. He with his

family settled in France where he was continuing activity as a physician and

the head of the Georgian emigration; actively participated in French

Resistance movement.

In 1951 he died in Scotland when he was visiting his daughter.

Tamar Tamarashvili

From the History of Education in Georgia (Telavi Pedagogical Technical Institut



In the article, according the archival primary sources, the most difficult

conditions existed in public life of Georgia of 20-30s of XX century are

critically taught and analyzed. The special place has been taken to the

significance of the results of holding the liquidation inevitable events of

literary ignorance and less knowing in the country.

The institutions of literary ignorance liquidation, general education

schools of different type, groups of evening and tuition by correspondence of

adults’ education, professional technical institutions were established in

whole republic. For timely settlement of this national importance problem,

the training of the pedagogical specialists was necessary.

Among the pedagogical technical institutions existed in East Georgia,

in Kakhety, Telavi pedagogical technical institution (1924-1939) took the

greatest part in generations’ education business.

Georgia and the World


Niko Javakhishvili

Trace of Georgians in the Baltics (From the end of XVII th – to the first half

of XIX th century)


In the previous research it is studied an activity of Georgians in the

Baltics from the end of XVII th century – to the first half of XIX th century.

There are 8 subtitles represented in the research:

1. Travel of the prince Alexander Bagration-Imeretinsky in Liflandia

and Kurlandia (End of the XVII th century);

2. Military way of princes Afanasi (Adarnase) and George Bagrationis

in Kurlandia (Middle of XVIII th century);

3. Travel of the prince Paata Bagrationi in the Baltics (End of the XVII

th century);

4. Military way of Georgian Husar’s regiment in the Baltics (50-ies of

XVIII th century);

5. Estate of general Peter Bagrationi in the Baltics (End of the XVII th

century – Beginning of the XIX th century);

6. The Baltics as seen by the last Georgian king from Bagrationi’s

Royal Dynasty – Gregory I (year 1813);

7. The Duke of Ksani Giorgi Eristavi in the Baltics (Thirties of the

XIXth century);

8. The Baltics descripted in prince Theimuraz Bagration’s work (year


George Bezhitashvili

The Certain Aspects of History of the Georgian Military Immigration in



In the Article, on the basis of rich historical material, activity of first

representatives of the Georgian Military Immigration in the state of Poland is

analyzed. It is shown, that such representative is already seen since the second

half of XVII century in face of Bogdan Gurjietski and his brother Parsadan.

The author quite justly considers, that the first Georgian talented

military emigrant played a great role in the matter of settling the diplomatic

relations between the state of Poland and Persian – Turkish countries.

The special attention is paid on historical relations of Poland and

Georgia, which was strengthened in further period, especially in the 10 year

of XXI century.

The author justly reviews the reasons resulting the Georgian military

immigration began since the 20s of XX century. The political immigration

leaving Georgia was folled by the representation of the Georgian Generals

and Officers. They stayed in Poland by support of Polish Authority.

Avtandil Songulashvili

Relations of Georgia with the Western Europe and the USA In the first

quarter of the XX century


Acquisition of Georgia by Russia and the abolition of the governmental

structures of Georgia have cut all the ways of relations with other countries

for Georgia. But the imperator has been always taking in mind geopolitical

situation of Georgia while communicating with other countries. In 1818,

French council has been established in Tbilisi. At the end of the XIX century

United States councils has been opened in Batumi and later in the 1914 it has

been moved to Tbilisi. Felix Volobe Smith was on the position of council of

USA in Tbilisi during the 1914-1919.

During the 1918-1921 Georgia had intensified its relations with

Germany, England, France, and Italy and with other countries of Europe.

In February-March of 1921 Soviet Russia has occupied Georgia which

ended the phase of relations with western countries. But in the first half of the

1920 initial contacts still has been continuing to be established.

Nodar Khorbaladze

From Russia’s Imperial Politics in Georgia


The work covers the aspects of Russian aggressive politics from XVIII

century till now; discusses the circumstances of Russia’s lack of compliance

with Treaty of Georgievsk terms, includes abolishment of reign and

independence in Georgia, together with its occupation and full annexation.

The stages of Georgian nation’s fight against this aggression is shown; the

work also covers the issues on restoration of independence by Georgian

people in 1918, development of Georgian democratic State, and its repeated

occupation and annexation by Bolshevik Russia in 1921. The work represents

the character of Georgian national-libratory movement in Soviet period and

declaration of independence by Georgia on Aril 9, 1991. Russian aggressive

politics against independent Georgia, and, aftermath, Russian military

aggression against sovereign State, that took place in August, 2008, is

describ ed.

Malkhaz Makaradze

Independent Georgia and Russian Aggression Politics


This work represents modern World and European security subjects;

there is showing generally Caucasus region and Georgian place and role in

carnet world global presses. It’s analyzed Russian’s aggression politics and

world concord to support to Georgia. It’s made property conclusion.

Sopho Davlasheridze

Restoration of Georgia Independence and Policy of USA of Soviet Spare


In the second part of 80 of XX century there started national freedom

movements new stage in Georgia. Exactly at that period the USA became

interested in Georgia.

On the base of the 31th of march, 1991 referendum, Georgia declared

independence and as a president Zviad Gamsakhurdia was elected. Though

there were persons who were against this fact.

The opposition considered the weak side of Zviad Gamsakhurdia’s

ruling his foreign policy. They thought that the mistakes made in this spare

provided national government for the crisis, but the government was lead to

the international isolation. It should be noticed, that the USA in the issue

considering to the normalization of relationships with Soviet Union revealed

the priority. And so the relations between republics made the second degree.

In the 31th of July, 1991, the president of USA and the Soviet Union

signed strategic weaponed decrease agreement. On the background of this

global important agreement, the administration of USA did not want to

express some kind of loyalty according to Georgian government, which was

against to the Kremlin. As Gamsakhurdia’s maximalistical government

refused to sign the new united agreement.

Kornely Kakachia

United States-Georgia Charter on Strategic Partnership: Does it protect

Georgia’s Sovereignity?


United States-Georgia Charter on Strategic Partnership signed on the

9th of January 2009 in Washington D.C. is an important document, the signature

and complete activation of which is essential for the territorial integrity

and political and economic success of Georgia. Bilateral Charter on Strategic

Partnership aims at increasing cooperation in defense, trade, energy, cultural

exchange among peoples and other areas. Georgian President Mikheil Sa320

akashvili named the Charter as the beginning of the «New Phase» in the international

relations of Georgia and the end of Russia’s two century dominance.

Many consider in Georgia that the Charter is unique and «historic»

document which underlines Washington’s strong support for Georgia and its

government, and can also be considered as the substitute guarantee of

Georgia’s hastened membership in NATO. But it is important to notice that

the phraseology of the text is identical to that analogical charter between

United States and Ukraine signed little earlier on the 19th of December 2008.

The western media as well as the majority of Georgian experts point to the

certain limitations of the Charter and note that the Charter does not oblige

Washington to defend Georgia militarily in case it is attacked.

The Charter was taken more or less unemotionally in Russia. As they

declare in Moscow, the Charter is only a declaration and United States new

administration is less probable to confront Russia because of Georgia. It is

also important to mention that the strategic partnership between Tbilisi and

Washington will benefit not only Georgia but also the security of the whole

South Caucasian Region. The paper deals with the significance of the United

States-Georgia Charter on Strategic Partnership and identifies to what extent

it can be considered as the security guarantee for Georgia.

The History of the Caucasus


Mzia Tkavashvili

From the History of the Scots’ Colony in the North Caucasus

(The beginning of the 19th century)


In 1802 the directory of the Protestant society in Edinburgh asked the

Russian government a permition for founding an office in the South of the

empire. Emperor Alexander I satisfied the requirement of Scots. The main

goal of Scots was the conversion of the neighboring mountain and plain

Muslim and pagan population into Christianity. The Russian government

greatly supported Scots.

Besides developing agriculture and industry they were actively

involved in cultural and educational work. In 1815 the typography was

opened, where 8000 copies of Bible were printed and spread among the

Muslim and pagan population.

In the 20es of the 19th century Scots were actively living the North

Caucasus. From the point of view of the missioners the native government

was oppressing them without any reason.

The History of the World


Tamar Antadze

William III of Orange


This work has an honorable aim and has a pure cognitive character.

Actually it is the first serious work in Georgian reality, which is about

William III of Orange’s life and activities.

Picturesque figure of William III of Orange is not brought forward

accidentally; it is stipulated by the fact, that nowadays forming principles of

parliamentarianism is very urgent in Georgia. That’s why we think that

Georgian reader will show interest in knowing activities of William Orange.

We tried to put a scientific element in the work and devoted attention to

considering activities of William III of Orange in Georgian historiography.

Vasil Kacharava

American Presidential Elections of 1952


The analyses of the comparison of the opposed party’s platform

showed, that republican’s platform was closer to the growing conservative

tendencies in the country. But in the mentioned elections probably the

presidential candidate’s personal quality and authority played a decisive role.

General Dwight Eisenhower, an all known hero of World War II, Supreme

Commander of the Allied forces in Europe, stood for the republicans. Adlai

Stevenson, the governor of Illinois represented was candidate from the

democrats; his brilliant intellect and oratorical talent played an important role

in this competition, and gave special charm to these elections.

During elections Eisenhower diminished the discussions about the New

Deal and at the same time acknowledged necessity of social security, housebuilding,

unemployment compensation and etc. As he stressed out those matters

should stand above politics. — «These are not matters, these are rights».

Certainly many conservative republicans did not agree with such statements,

but even they realized that it would be better to bring to halt further discussions,

at least during the elections. Eisenhower did really fulfill his promises

after he had been elected. One important promise he gave to the nation was

that he would go Korea himself and end the war there, which turned out to be

a decisive message in this campaign.

As for the democrats, though many Americans still favored the New

Deal programs and liked Stevenson’s brilliant speeches, they simply wanted

to put the cronyism, sacrifices and Korean War behind it. At the same time,

twenty years in power was too heavy burden for one party.

Finally, the election of 1952 ended up with Eisenhower’s impressive

victory. He received 33, 9 million votes; Stevenson received only 27, 3

million. Eisenhower won in 39 states, democrats just in 9.

D. Eisenhower achieved complete victory in northern and western

states, part of south and its neighbor states. Since 1928 republican candidate

had never won in so called Solid South and this victory was really impressive.

Southerners were scared by Stevenson activity regarding human rights issues.

Eisenhower supported by a big segment of traditional democrats, like

Catholics, trade unions, young voters. He was very successful in recently

developed suburbs. Majority of the Big Business demanding reduction of

taxes and state regulations also were on his side. Even the scandal with

Richard Nixon’s Secret Fund did not change positive attitude toward the

republicans. Actually, Nixon’s «Checkers Speech», became real a political

triumpThr fuotrh fhuimlly. , America in these elections needed a trustworthy,

distinguished, experienced and full of life experience person and not an

idealist intellectual such as Stevenson.

Vasil Kacharava

Ideology of Political Parties and their Platforms in the Presidential Elections

of the United States in 1952


In the article are considered the principal differences between leading

parties. Particularly we would like to compare the elections of 1952, with the

elections of 1920 and 1932, when the struggle between the two leading parties

was distinguished by special ideological contradiction. By 1952 the

republicans were more flexible and absorbed many lessons from the «New

Deal». In the platform of the Democratic Party, there was a quite standard,

etatist attitude to the activities of federal administration characteristic to this

party. Because of national security issues the democrats did not say anything

about tax decrease. They promised traditional support to farmers, referring to

the success of the New Deal and strictly criticizing Taft-Hartley’s, virtually,

an anti trade union law. They noted the role of Democratic Party in the

formation of social security system and promised to voters its further

development. In the education sphere, they planning to increase financial

assistance to states in building of schools, but categorically denied any federal

control or dictate in this sphere.

Of course the republican platform’s text started with enormous criticism

and accusations against the democrats. For the internal policy they offered

standard republican recipes. In particular, republicans promised,

republicans promised tax reduction for big and small businesses. Unalike

democrats, they planned to balance budget by decreasing federal costs. At the

same time, republicans planned redistribution of power and responsibilities

among federal government, state and local authorities on basis of further

decentralization. The republicans considered maintaining Taft-Hartley law,

because it was protection against unfair practices by either employer or union

officials. Though they did not deny that it was possible to change some

articles in the law.

In the condition of Cold War, in the programs of both parties probably

the biggest attention was conceded to foreign policy. Democrats emphasized

the reinforcement of self-defense and cooperation of free nations in UN. They

supported Europe’s integration and unification of Germany. At the same time

they initiated maximum help to victims of Soviet Imperialism. Republicans

blamed democrats in strengthening communism in Europe and Asia.

Certainly main wave of criticism was directed to the Korean War.

Republicans promised the voters to promote a healthier and stronger foreign

policy, and also the end Korean War.

It must be outlined, that the republican’s platform better reflected

growing conservative tendencies in the country. But as mentioned above, in

the elections of 1952 the candidates personality played far more important

role and as the results showed, the national hero Dwight Eisenhower

obviously defeated democrat Adlai Stevenson.

The Policy


Tengiz Grigolia

Russia and Iran in Close-east Regional Geopolitics


Russia and Iran has been involved in regional politics of close east during

the centuries. In the beginning of the 20th century Russia along with the

England has been involved in dividing Iran between the influence zones. Af377

ter the year of 1917 the Soviet Union government began to establish new relationship

with Iran.

After the cold war Iran has been among the anti Soviet Union

countries. After the 1950 of the 20th century Iran has become the strategic

partner of the USA. Iran has established its military technical relationships

with the USA.

After the 1970 Iran has made its major changes in Foreign Policies.

Very important in Iran’s history was the anti western revolution. Islamic

revolution changed the vision about the division of the geopolitical powers.

From 1980, Iran began to overlook the relationships with the Soviet Union.

After the abolition of the Soviet Union, Russia and Iran has faced new

geopolitical reality. Under these circumstances began Russian-Iran

cooperation in a sphere of the nuclear energy. Nowadays in a sphere of

nuclear power the cooperation with Iran is held only from the Russian side.

Russia and Iran has the same strategic interests.

Tornike Shurgulaia

National Security Agency (NSA) of the USA (Black Room)


The National Security Agency (NSA) is one of the largest components

of the U.S. Intelligence Community. NSA is responsible for obtaining

intelligence from international communications links, by the widespread

availability of low-cost encryption systems, and by changes in the

international environment in which dangerous security threats can come from

small, but well organized, terrorist groups as well as hostile nation states.

NSA was established in 1952 as a highly compartmented secret

codebreaking effort undertaken by a handful of military officers and civilians,

but the Agency has gradually become an acknowledged government agency

responsible for intelligence signals. NSA has employed many highly gifted

scientists, engineers, and mathematicians.

NSA’s eavesdropping mission includes radio broadcasting, both from

various organizations and individuals, the Internet, telephone calls, and other

intercepted forms of communication. Its secure communications mission

includes military, diplomatic, and all other sensitive, confidential or secret

government communications. It has been described as the world’s largest

single employer of mathematicians, and the owner of the single largest group

of supercomputers[clarification needed], but it has tried to keep a low profile.

For many years, its existence was not acknowledged by the U.S. government,

earning it the nickname, “No Such Agency” (NSA). Due to the fact that the

agency rarely makes any public remarks, it has been quipped that their motto

is “never say anything”.

In 2004, NSA Central Security Service and the National Cyber Security

Division of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agreed to expand

NSA Centers of Academic Excellence in Information Assurance Education


As part of the National Security Presidential Directive 54/Homeland

Security Presidential Directive 23 (NSPD 54), signed on January 8, 2008 by

President Bush, the NSA became the lead agency to monitor and protect all of

the federal government’s computer networks from cyber-terrorism.

NSA’s mission, as set forth in Executive Order 12333, is to collect

information that constitutes “foreign intelligence or counterintelligence”

while not “acquiring information concerning the domestic activities of United

States persons”. NSA has declared that it relies on the FBI to collect

information on foreign intelligence activities within the borders of the USA,

while confining its own activities within the USA to the embassies and

missions of foreign nations.

NSA’s domestic surveillance activities are limited by the requirements

imposed by the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; however, these

protections do not apply to non-U.S. persons located outside of U.S. borders,

so the NSA’s foreign surveillance efforts are subject to far fewer limitations

under U.S. law. The specific requirements for domestic surveillance

operations are contained in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978

(FISA), which does not extend protection to non-U.S. citizens located outside

of U.S. territory.

These activities, especially the publicly acknowledged domestic

telephone tapping and call database programs, have prompted questions about

the extent of the NSA’s activities and concerns about threats to privacy and

the rule of law.

Since the existence of the NSA has become more widely known in the

past few decades, and particularly since the 1990s, the agency has regularly

been portrayed in spy fiction. Many such portrayals grossly exaggerate the

organization’s involvement in the more sensational activities of intelligence

agencies. The agency now plays a role in numerous books, films, television

shows, and computer games.

Maia Amirgulashvili

Modern Tendencies of Globalization


In modern world dependence to globalization is very different, which

follows perception of this processes and results differently.

According to modern tendencies and different views to objective

analyses, generally globalization represents between countries and regions

influence and interdependence to reinforcement the process, which abolishes

lingual, territorial, economical, mental barriers and directed to

culturalcivilization union and controlled to create lingual system.

Millitary History


Teimuraz Dalaqishvili, Khatuna Todadze, Davit Mamulaishvili

Traditional Caucasus Cold Weapons History and Geography of their

Production Main Types


This article represents traditional Caucasus cold weapon tipes witch

belongs to the cutting groups. Hier is revived historical aspects and geography

of their production. Is given analysis of weapon designes and sum

constructural properties. Also is revived purpose of such type cold weapons.

Religion. The History of the Church


Eldar Bubulashvili

Unknown Material about Religious Education (20-ies of the 20th century)


In the scientific work on the basis of studying of recently revealed

unknown material it is ascertained that in April, 1922 on the initiative of the

Catholicos-Patriarch of Georgia Ambrosi Khelaia confessional religious school

was established in order to prepare ecclesiastical personnel. Director of

Confessional School was Archpriest Kalistrate Tsintsadze who on consecration

of the Patriarch compiled a curriculum and invited specialists of corresponding

field. Well-known ecclesiastics were invited as teachers. Church took care of

students’ nutrition, accommodation and dressing questions. Students lived at the

patriarchate residence. The school existed till 12 January, 1923. It was closed on

the instruction of the Soviet atheistic regime.

In the work activity of «Women Circle» of Kashueti St. Giorgi Church

is also studied. This group of women provided choristers of the church with

financial supply.

Sophio Andghuladze

Georgian Clergy in the Period of Establishing Soviet Totalitarian Regime and

the Bishop of Bodbe Stephane (Vasil Karbelashvili)


Centuries old history of Georgia is the history of fighting for

preserving Orthodox Christianity. That is why the contribution of the

Georgian clergy in the fight for defending everlasting values is immense. The

Georgian people had many times faced the danger of losing the national faith.

But the violence Georgia underwent from the beginning of the 19th century

after the annexation of the Orthodox Russia was one he had never suffered

before. The empire’s religious policy aimed to destroy the national values of

the peoples who were the annexed members of this empire. Finally this policy

should have to promote the process of their assimilation.

According to the political changes, after the annexing of the Democratic

Republic of Georgia by Bolsheviks in February 1921 ruling authorities

of the Bolsheviks declared a merciless war against the classes and social layers

that were inadmissible for their ideology. From this point of view the

clergy suffered most of all. Anti-religious campaign that was carried out on

the background of establishing totalitarian regime put the leaders of the Or

thodox Church of Georgia in front of solving the new problems. The Soviet

ideology opposed the church with full strength. The national church of Georgia

legally lost once more its main historical function and aim. The clergy

continued its fight in another dimension, mainly to rescue the church physically.

Though the church was near destruction and the layer of clergy was

suffering unprecedented persecution and repressions the Georgian clergy

stood the danger with dignity and played a great role in rescuing the national

church. The research and analysis of the activities of prominent Georgian

church figures of those days able us to come to the above mentioned conclusion.

The carried on research and analysis obviously showed that the secret of

their success was the defense of the national Orthodox faith with particular

firmness and generally in devotion of the Christian doctrine. The bishop of

Bodbe Stephane is one of the above mentioned clergy who, with his activity,

resisted the destructive power of the Bolsheviks’ regime against the main

spiritual value of Georgians – national Orthodoxy and paid the greatest role in

its defense and preservation.



Merab Kalandadze

Modern History of Eastern Europe Studies in Georgia


In this topic is researched the studies of modern history of Eastern

Europe in Georgia. Till now this theme was not explored.

Founders of modern history of Eastern Europe studies in Georgia are

prof. Nicholas Dubrovsky, prof. Grigol Natadze and Alexander Namoradze.

Great contribution in the studies were made by their followers: prof.

Givi Kiguradze, prof. Kote Antadze, prof. Ilia Tabagua, prof. Kukuri

Liluashvili, prof. Karlo Meshveliani, prof. Archil Chkheidze, prof. Guram

Manjgaladze and their colleges prof. Varlam Donadze and prof. Givi

JordanTiao. d ay their disciples continue working and this is, already the third

generation of researchers.



Niko Javakhishvili

For the History of Toponym «Tbilisi»


In the previous research it is studied an activity of Georgians in the

Baltics from the end of XVII th century to the beginning of XIX th century.

There are 7 subtitles represented in the research:

The capital city of Georgia – Tbilisi is nominated as «Tfilisi» («Tiflis»)

in old Georgian annals.

It’s interesting when the city of «Tfilisi» («Tiflis») was named «Tbilisi».

It is explained in encyclopedias, that the name «Tfilisi» («Tiflis») was

changed to «Tbilisi» since 1936.

One historical document preserved in the Central State Historical

Archive of Georgia gives us a possibility to revise above mentioned

explanations. The document represents itself an original of the deed issued by

the King of Kartli-Kakheti (Kartalino-Kakhetia) – Erekle II (1720-1798) on

May 1, 1795 and where the toponym «Tbilisi» is mentioned. It is remarkable

that this document is not only the one, issued by Erekle II, where we meet the

toponym «Tfilisi» («Tiflis»).

Therefore, above mentioned archived document gives us an

opportunity to prove that toponym «Tbilisi» was noted as equivalent to

«Tfilisi» («Tiflis») as far back as from the end of XVIIIth century, during the

existence of the Kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti (Kartalino-Kakhetia).

Khatuna Kokrashvili

Archimandrite of «The Osetia Ecclesiastic Commission» Nikifore About the

Settlement Of the Osetians in Shida Kartli (1817 – 1818)


The viewpoint about the settlement of Osetians in Georgia from

ancient times is denied in Georgian historiography. In scientific literature it is

well proved that their migration and compact settlement on the territory of

modern Tskhinvali was not simultaneous process but successive during the

17th – 19th centuries.

The viewpoints about defining the area and number of the Osetians’

settlement still differ between Georgian and the Osetian scientists. After

wrong reading of the historical documents the Osetian scientists try to prove

the organized migration and settlement of the Osetians big group from the

North Caucasus in Kartli in the 18th century; that at the end of the 18th century

the amount of the Osetians was quite high (6000 – 7000 families). The Georgian

scientists prove that in the 17th – 18th centuries and in the first half of the

19th century the Osetians were of insignificant amount. On the basis of historical

sources and census analysis it is soundly proved in Georgian historiography

that at the end of the 18th and in the 10’s of the 19th century there lived

only 2130 families (except Dvaleti, the historical province of Georgia), that

approximately means 15 000 men.

The displaying of each new document or source that additionally

clarifies the point is worth of extreme interest. The ecclesiastic sources,

sources compiled by clergymen etc. about settlement and amount of the

Osetians in the 10’s of the 19th century in Shida Kartli should be worth of

interest. The clergymen were in close and direct relations with the local

population, each family, each person and thus, their information, documents

are worth to be taken into consideration for the reconstruction of the historical

reality. We decided that it might be expedient to publish the archive

documents found by us, mainly the text of The Osetia Ecclesiastic

Commission’s preacher – Archimandrite Nikipore’s account that was

presented by him to the exarch of Georgia Theophylact. The account of the

archimandrite Theophylact consists of valuable data about the dwelling area

and amount of the Osetians in the mountain gorges of Shida (inner) Kartli. In

our opinion, the comparison of this document with different sources and its

analysis will define more precisely or harden the viewpoints on the subject

that were accepted in Georgian historiography.

Mzia Mgaloblishvili, Lela Mikiashvili

The Materials From the History of Abkhazia Principality of the 30es of the

19th Century (According to «The Travel» by Frederic Dubois de Monpere)


Frederic Duboios de Monpere (1798-1850) was a scientist – traveler,

whose publications led to the development of the European Kartvelology.

Frenchman by origin, born in Switzerland, he was a famous geologist,

naturalist and archeologist. Dubois traveled in different countries including

the Caucasus, namely Georgia (1833-1834), which was reflected in his

extensive work (in 6 volums) «Travels around the Caucasus, at Circassians

and Abkhazians, in Kolkhida, in Georgia, Armenia and the Crimea». The

work is written in spesific style and represents a diary of this author, in which

he describes in detals facts seen and heard by him. «The Travel» played an

important role in the Georgian source studies: Due to the known political

events – i. e. after conquering Georgia by Russia there appeared a gap in

Georgian historiography describing the first part of the 19th century.

Therefore «The Travel» is a primary source for the history of Georgia of

above-mentioned period.

The one of the chapters of the work is dedicated to the description of

Abkhazia. The history, geography and the nature of Abkhazia is described in

it. The author widly uses the historical sources (the accounts of the antique

authors among them). Du to his professionalism Dubois deals with the facts

telling us the relations of the Abkhazian rulers’ with the Russian government;

describes his personal meetings with Mikheil-beg (in Likhni) and Hasan-beg

(in Kelasuri) Shervashidzes; deals with the political activity of Russia to

capture Abkhazia (and generally the whole western Georgia).

Gia Gelashvili

Three Documents about Georgia


In the following article there is given the Georgian translation of the

three English documents registered in the Wardrop Collection (Bodleian Library,

Oxford). These are:

1. Georgia and her Students (in Vox Studentium, 1924.X). – There is

told about Georgian students, who were sent in 1918 to the Universities of

Europe by Georgian Government, and their financial position after the Soviet

power intervened in Georgia in 1921.

2. Georgia between Turkish and German Pincers. – It’s a review of

events in Georgia and Transcaucasia since 26-th May up to 20-th August

1918, by Georgian Information Bureau.

3. This Document sent by Georgian Information Bureau (17.IX.1918)

is about murder of Catholicos-Patriarch of Georgia, Kyrion II on 10-th September

1918 and his short biography.


Irakli Paghava

The Weight Standard, Denominations’ System and Minting Technique of

Tiflis Coins (Afsharid Period)


The objective of our work was to study the Afsharid gold and silver

coinage from Tiflis, Georgia (Georgian-Afsharid coinage) and analyze the

employed minting technique. The coins were minted by the Afsharid administration

in the name of Abbas III Safavid, Nadir-Shah, Shakhrukh, Ibrahim

and again Shakhrukh sequentially. The silver coins were minted by two different

standards: 1 toman = 1,400 nokhod and later 1,200 nokhod. The gold

coins were minted by the 3.46 g ashrafi standard, and later on seemingly by

the 11 g mokhur standard (the «pluri» coin, mentioned by P. Orbelian should

in our opinion constitute the ¼ mokhur denomination).

Shahi, mahmudi, abbasi, 6-shahi, nadiri (10-shahi), 3-abbasi (12-shahi,

marchili) denominations were minted in silver; ashrafi and possibly also ¼

mokhur were minted in gold.

The minting technique did not differ much from that in use in the Safavid

period. Minting implied the work in 10 stages as presented in Tadhkirat

Al-Muluk and other sources. These stages are described in detail based on the

comparative numismatic material from the region. In our opinion, the P. Orbeliani’s

note on Ibrahim sending «a mint» to Tiflis implied the central distribution

of dies for producing the coins in the name of this Afsharid ruler locally.

This assumption bears some significance in terms of both minting organization

in Georgia and the political relationship between the Georgian

government and the Afsharids.

Hopefully, our data would further facilitate the research of the numismatic

and generally economical and political history of Georgia, as well as

that of the Afsharid state.

View Point


Zurab kvetenadze

Is it Necessary that Georgian History «Write again?»


Recently in historical science, historical publicity or private discussions

there is highlighted the idea, that it’s time to appreciate historical development

of Georgian nation in new way, that it’s necessary that history write


We think that main problem is to realize the way that Georgian nation

passed historically. Great authorities Ivane Javaxishvili, Nico Berzenishvili,

Simon Janashia, Shota Mesxia and others perfectly wrote the history of Georgia

and no one can write it again. It’s not necessary to write the history from

the beginning, but have to write the one that have not been written. We mean

philosophical realization of Georgian history. At that time Ivane Javaxishvili

was also talked about the necessity to write the philosophy of history. Such

history has to be written exactly by such authority or group of authorities.

And such persons are made by history and epoch itself.

It’s necessary to create the imminent history of Georgian nation. It has

to write not only by its external tragic fate, but at first by internal tragic that is

inspired by the war for freedom. Georgian historian has to discuss the concept

of freedom in the history of Georgia and its mystical importance. We say that

orthodox Christianity had very important role is the history of Georgia, but

it’s necessary to see it in symbols and other kind of sights that come from

godlike world and mention such thought. We think that it’s exactly the patrimonial


Criticism and Bibliography


Niko Javakhishvili

Solid Scientific Work

In the Memory of Our Collegue


Dodo Chuburidze

Aleksandre Bendianashvili

May 12, 2010 Posted by | 4. NEW PABLICATIONS | Leave a comment