Georgian Nationalism: Fabricating History and Denying Abkhazian Identity
Exploring the Ongoing Campaign of Historical Distortion and Ethnic Denial by Georgian Nationalists Against the Abkhaz People
Last year, under the title "What AW Receives from Georgians Daily," we shared some of the frequent messages we receive from Georgians, especially through social media. Today, we will share more of the comments and messages we receive almost daily at the same pace, and we will also share our thoughts on this matter.
First, let's share some of the comments we received in the last 24 hours.
You can view the images in full and read their contents by clicking on them.
As you can see, we are dealing with an incredibly ignorant group of people who, —putting complex historical issues aside—, claim that the language of the people they once lived alongside (albeit forcibly) doesn't even have a word for "sea."
Imagine a people trying to explain simple concepts, like the word “sea” in their language, to their neighbours. Yet, the other side remains incapable of understanding or accepting even such a basic fact. Nationalism has blinded their eyes and hearts.
+ Exposing Ignorance: Navigating the Sea of Deceptions
+ X (Formerly Twitter) post from last year
+ Abkhazia Through Time | 2 — X post from 20 May 2024
Despite explaining very simple facts, such as the existence of the word "sea" in Abkhaz for years, these comments keep coming, and dozens of Georgians like these comments. Unfortunately, a large portion of the Georgian population believes this distorted, incorrect information and denies our Abkhaz identity and history. Leaving aside their past wars against us and what happened to us during the Stalin-Beria era etc..., how can we live together with people who deny our ethnic, cultural, and historical identity?
Most of you probably know that the claim by Pavle Ingorokva - that the Abkhaz(ians) are not the indigenous people of Abkhazia and that they arrived only in the 17th century, assimilating the true Abkhaz (i.e., the Georgians) and taking their name - has been frequently and repeatedly voiced by many (including some scholars, politicians, journalists) in Georgia for years.
As two Abkhazian politicians Arkhip Labakhua and Ivan Tarba noted in a letter sent to the Presidium of the Communist Party on 19 April 1957, ‘Ingoroqva strives “to lay a foundation” for his anti-scholarly thesis by means of the falsification of historical documents and pseudo-scholarly linguistic exercises on toponyms’, positing that today's Abkhazians migrated to Transcaucasia only in the 17th century, displacing and subsequently adopting the name of the 'true' Abkhazians, who, according to him, were originally a Georgian tribe. Such claims were amplified during the fervent days of Georgian nationalism from 1988 onward. See:
This has led many to view the Abkhazians as outsiders in their own homeland.
But the facts are:
Archaeological, linguistic, and anthropological evidence points to the Abkhaz people as indigenous inhabitants of the region known today as Abkhazia. Their presence in this region predates the 17th century by many millennia.
The Abkhaz language, part of the Northwest Caucasian language family, stands distinct from the Kartvelian languages, including Georgian. This linguistic uniqueness testifies to the Abkhazians' separate identity and deep-rooted history in the region.
History, when taken out of context or selectively used, can be manipulated for political objectives. It is essential to approach such sensitive topics with care, relying on robust scholarly consensus rather than individual interpretations. As one of the greatest historians ever, Eric Hobsbawm stated:
“For history is the raw material for nationalist or ethnic or fundamentalist ideologies, as poppies are the raw material for heroin addiction. The past is an essential element, perhaps the essential element, in these ideologies. If there is no suitable past, it can always be invented.”
— Eric Hobsbawm (co-edited with Terence Ranger), "The Invention of Tradition," Cambridge University Press, 2012
And unfortunately, this is exactly what Georgians are doing. They are inventing a suitable past for themselves.
Before we move on to another topic, you can find some recommended sources for further reading on this subject below.
+ Rewriting History? A Critique of Modern Georgian Historiography on Abkhazia
+ The Ibero-Caucasian hypothesis and the historiography of Abkhazia, by Kevin Tuite
+ The value of the past: myths, identity and politics in Transcaucasia, by Victor A. Shnirelman
+ Responses to Some Fanciful Ideas of a “Historian” from Paris, Badri Gogia, by Denis Gopia
You can access the X post above by clicking here.
Marika Mikiashvili, considers the attendance [Later, she clarified our comment, saying, “No, it's not about the attendance, it's about the GD rule” — Indeed, we thanked her for this incredibly important correction.] of Georgian officials at the funeral of the late Iranian President as one of the darkest days in their history. However, it’s obvious from the end of her sentence that she neither knows nor understands the history she refers to. If she wishes, we can remind her of the truly dark days in Georgian history. But what we really want to comment on is something different... the end of the sentence... namely, 3,300...
Marika claims that Georgia has had statehood for 3,300 years! Afterwards, someone advises her to be cautious, and she then references Colchis to support her claim. Even though her friend advises her, her blind nationalist perspective doesn't stop her from commenting on and insisting on something she knows nothing about.
If the educated believe this, what hope is there for the uneducated???
Colchis was NOT a Georgian state. Again: Colchis was NOT a Georgian state. Colchis was a region with very diverse populations and it was not a centralised kingdom. There is still so much we don't know about Colchis, with experts continuing to debate and research many aspects of its history and culture. Without sufficient evidence, many details remain shrouded in mystery.
For example, regarding the modern territory of Abkhazia, even the location of the city of Dioscurias is actually uncertain, yes most of scholars suggesting Sukhum while a few others propose Ochamchira.
Just take 5 mins to read the article Greeks and "Georgians" in ancient Colchis [Nationalism, politics, and the practice of archaeology, by Philip L. Kohl and Clare Fawcett (eds). Cambridge University Press (1996).] by one of the greatest archaeologists in the field, the late Gocha Tsetskhladze, who was also a Georgian, and Philip Kohl, whom we lost two years ago, just like Tsetskhladze.
Back in 1989, Georgian historian Lovard Tukhashvili wrote in an article titled "How old are we" in the newspaper Zarya Vostoka that the Georgian state is 6,000 years old. Thankfully, Marika has cut this claim in half over the past 30 years. Maybe in another 30 years, we can hope for a more reasonable interpretation of history from Marika and other nationalist Georgians.
As the great Ossetian linguist Vasiliy Abaev said: ‘The analysis of national ethno-psychology, heightened ambition, unshakeable self-love, pride.’ And that is all! National conceit becomes the determiner of the age of national statehood -- the greater the conceit, the older the state. Such is the level of the new fascistic historiography of Georgia.'
And let's remember once again the words of Eric Hobsbawm: “For history is the raw material for nationalist or ethnic or fundamentalist ideologies, as poppies are the raw material for heroin addiction. The past is an essential element, perhaps the essential element, in these ideologies. If there is no suitable past, it can always be invented.”
In a thought-provoking segment from "Hobsbawm: A Life in History," broadcast on BBC 4 on April 12, 2012, the late distinguished historian Eric Hobsbawm, interviewed by Simon Schama, delved into the intricate challenges and distortions facing the study of history. In this conversation, Hobsbawm highlighted the emergence of identity-based histories and the troubling rise of nationalism. See: https://abkhazworld.com/aw/blogs/2572-eric-hobsbawm-on-nationalism-and-distorting-history-a-critical-reflection
This is exactly what Marika and most of her fellow Georgians are doing. They are inventing a suitable past for themselves.
By the way, Abaev responded to Tukhashvili's nonsense with the following:
"Let us move from concocted ‘patriotic’ fantasies to actual history. Before the 10th century of our era there is not a hint of any Georgian kingdom. If before that time a Georgian-speaking ‘kingdom’ did exist, then it had no political relevance even within the confines of Transcaucasia. Only with King David the Builder (1073-1125) does the Georgian state gain a stable political status and, thanks to the crusades, become known in the West. ‘The Georgian Chronicle’ begins by presenting a varied mix of fantasy with reality. Many ‘kings’ figure here. But there is something odd -- not one of them has a Georgian name -- they are all Iranian." [Abaev refers to the Pharnavazid dynasty]
He continues:
"All this has been demonstrated by Georgian historians themselves, the venerable Ivane Dzhavakhishvili among them. From Dzhavakhishvili to Tukhashvili -- what a deplorable degradation!."
Unfortunately, this degradation continues today with people like Marika.