Cjss second Issue: cjss second Issue qxd

Fr. Bellarmino Bagatti. Jerusalem. 
Zhamtaaghmtsereli (Chronicler), (1959). Text Determined on the basis
of all major manuscripts by S. Kaukhchishvili. Georgian Chronicles, II. Tbilisi.
(Georgian).
118
Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences

---

Narrative of the United Caucasus: Political or 
Historical Project?
Nino Chikovani
Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University
he paper deals with the problem of the narrative of united Cau-
casus in the prism of interrelation of historical narrative and col-
lective memory. The idea of the Caucasian unity has been existed
for centuries. At different times it has got different content and
shape. The attempts of creation of the common Caucasian narra-
tive were blown a new breath in the post Soviet period, emerging
in different contents, although they were found to be unsuccessful.
The experience of the common past, preserved in the collective
memory, turned out to be unable to overcome existed grievances,
territorial pretenses and mutual allegations preserved by the same
memory. The offered analyses of the presented materials point to
the narrative of united Caucasus more as a political/ideological
myth, rather then a real project, based on a historical reality.
erTiani kavkasiis narativi: 
politikuri Tu istoriuli proeqti?
nino Ciqovani
ivane javaxiSvilis saxelobis saxelmwifo universiteti
aSromSi ganxilulia erTiani kavkasiis narativis sakiTxi,
koleqtiuri mexsierebisa da istoriuli narativis
urTierTmimarTebis problemis fonze. erTiani kavkasiis
idea arsebobis saukuneebs iTvlis. sxvadasxva istoriul pe-
riodSi igi sxvadasxva Sinaarssa da formas iRebda. post-
sabWoTa periodSi man axali datvirTva SeiZina, Tumca
erTiani kavkasiis narativis Seqmnis mcdelobani uSedego aR-
moCnda. koleqtiur mexsierebaSi Semonaxulma saerTo war-
sulis gamocdilebam ver SeZlo gadaefara imave mexsierebaSi
daleqili urTierTundobloba, wyena, teritoriuli pre-
tenziebi. warmodgenili masalis safuZvelze, erTiani
kavkasiis narativi warmogvidgeba ufro rogorc poli-
tikuri/ideologiuri miTi, vidre istoriul realobaze
damyarebuli proeqti. 
n
n
T
T
119
Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences

---

The issue of the unity of the Caucasus became a topic of the constant de-
bates and discussions since the 90s of the 20
th
century, when the “total tri-
umph of the memory”, as called by Piere Norra, was fully experienced by the
peoples of the Caucasus.   
The studies in the collective and historical memory have revealed that
the social groups are determining the topics for remembering and forgetting
(Burke, 1980) and our memory and our history are being constructed by
them according to the contemporary needs. Paper aims to analyze the narra-
tive of the united Caucasus through the political context, which determined its
different forms and influenced on its actualization at the different times.
The sole successful attempt of the political unification of the Caucasus
was exercised in the 11
th
-12
th 
centuries. It was the period of the unification of
the Georgian political entities. Although the success of the process was not
guaranteed yet, the idea of the united Caucasian state was born. The concep-
tion of Leonti Mroveli (Leonti Mroveli, 1995) was a successful attempt of the
creation of the common Caucasian narrative, which is gradually revealed in
the description of the facts of and in their interpretation (the myth on the ori-
gins – the common origins of the Caucasian peoples, formation of the Geor-
gian state with participation of the different peoples, relations with the
neighbors, formation of the Georgian language and its declaration as a state
language, creation of the written language, pagan Gods and Christianization).  
It’s a well-known fact that the common historical legacy, the common
history and the common ancestors play an important role in the formation of
the group ethnic identity. The so called ethno-historical myths are the crucial
factors in the formation of the identity, enabling the different communities
to identify with their ancestors (Smith, 1986). Exactly this function is ascribed
to the myth of the common origins of the Caucasian peoples in the work of
Leonti Mroveli. In this respect, it is an interesting piece of the formation of
historical memory.
The ideological-political conception formed in the 11
th
century and the
attempts of the creation of the common Caucasian narrative (or the one
encompassing any part of the Caucasus) were “revitalized” later. For example,
during the reign of Erekle II, the idea of the unification of the South Caucasus
under the rule of the King Erekle emerged (Tukhashvili, 1972; Macharadze,
1989). In this case the role of the center was ascribed to Georgia as well,
although the circumstances were radically differert and this idea of unity was
determiend by the actuality of the fireign orientation.
Caucasian peoples were united in the framework of the Russian Empire.
The administrative entities of the South and the North Caucasus became the
120
Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences

---

parts of the region ruled by governor-general, whereas Tbilisi was ascribed
the role of the administrative center. The unification in the common political
space contributed to the restoration of the traditional contacts and
actualization of the common past and the memory of the histoical co-
existence between the peoples of the Caucasus, although the imperial
principle of divide et imepa was a serious problem and challange in this
respect. 
Since that period, the name of Shamil is among those which founded the
different versions of the common Caucasin narrative. Imamat – unification of
the portion of the Northern Caucasus – became a symbol of the unity of the
Caucasian peoples in their struggle against Russia. The offical narrative was
created during the Soviet time, in which the two stages could be easily
discerned, as well as the counter-narrative, being finally shaped in the post-
soviet period.
From the 20s of the 20th century Shamil was the hero of the struggle for
independence from the Tsarist rule and collonializm. Although the above-
described portrait did not fit in its entirely to the interests of the soviet
historiography as the name of Shamil was assosiated with the anti-Russian
and anti-soviet movements. His name became even more contradictory from
the 1950s, when Shamil was officially declared as “the reactioner” and “the
agent of the Ottoma Turkey and England.” The Soviet historiography tried to
find a compromised variant for the created dillema: Shamil himself was the
leader of the “progressive”, “popular”, “anti-collonial” and “national-
independent” movement, but later on “anti-popular” feudal and clerical
elements took the leadership and the movement got a reactionary nature
(Gammer, 1999). The version was in effect till the end of the Soviet Union.
After the dissolution of the Soviet Union Shamil became a national hero
for Chechnya and Dagestan. The different political camps were trying to use
him for their purposes. As a reaction to the Soviet narrative, the different ver-
sions of narratives on Shamil were formed. The Dagestan-Avar narrative is
among them, in which the fact that Shamil was originally Avar played an im-
portant role and it was the element of the national identity and collective
memory of Avars. A kind of compromised nature of the above-mentioned nar-
rative should be stressed: the victories of Shamil are a matter of proud,
whereas the enemy is not mentioned at all (Gammer, 1999).
The different narrative has been created in Chechnya. In this case the
main element of the formation of the collective identity and memory was the
three centuries long struggle against Russia in which Shamil was the main
figure and symbol. Although other figures also appear, among them Imam
Mansur should be mentioned first and foremost, with Chechen origins and
121
Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences

---