Czech – Georgian Literary and Cultural Relations

Czech – Georgian Literary and Scientific Contacts

English Version

1. Theses of the project parts
1. Literary History and Philology Section

1.1. Giuli Lezhava: Periods of Czech-Georgian Literary and Cultural Relations

1.2. Anna Lobova: Language Interference in the Tbilisi Colloquial Georgian
2. Philosophy and Religious Studies Section

2.1. Václav A. Černý: Paganism in the Caucasus

2.2. Lela Alexidze: Philosophy of Vojtěch Raňkov of Ježov

2.3. Tengiz Iremadze: Reception of the Bernard Bolzano´s Philosophy in the work by Shalva Nutsubidze

2.4. Giorgi Kheoshvili: Konstantin Chkheidze and Prague Archive of N. F. Fedorov
3. Cultural History Section

3.1. Vojtěch Kubec: Capuchins from Czech Province on a Georgian Mission

3.2. Marta Vaculínová: Image of Georgia in funds of the National Museum Library from 15th to 18th centuries

2. Participants

CVs and bibliography


1. Theses of the project parts
Literary History and Philology Section
Giuli Lezhava: Periods of Czech-Georgian Literary and Cultural Relations
Intensified Czech-Georgian literary and cultural relations – interest of Czech people in Georgia and vice versa – date back to the second half of the 19th century. Georgian-Czech literary and cultural relations can be described in four chapters.

19th Century - Beginning
Nineteenth century was the period of discovering Georgia by Czech people and other European nations. At that time it still was not known that Georgian culture was distinct and had different traditions with development differing from that of other nations in the Caucasus region. Many Czech writers were inspired by the Caucasus and Georgia, eg. Svatopluk Čech, Julius Zeyer, Zikmund Winter, Růžena Jesenská, which is also true about painters, musicians, etc.
Georgians were discovering Czech people in a similar way. By the end of the 19th century a historian Teimuraz Bagrationi visited Bohemia. His book Puteshestvie moje po stranam Jevropy is a detailed and colourful description of his impressions. Ilia Chavchavadze, a well-known writer and politician, in his paper The Nation and History introduced and made a detailed analysis of Czech language, history and other problems.

After WWII
This chapter is mainly devoted to the philologist Jaromír Jedlička whose activities were extensive. He wrote scientific papers, translated in cooperation with Georgian translator Elene Eristavi, who taught Czech in the Institute of Foreign Languages, and also was the author of the Czech language textbook for Georgians. Works by classical Czech writers - Karel Čapek, Jaroslav Hašek, Božena Němcová and others – were translated into Georgian.

Since the late 1970s
This chapter is not arranged very clearly. Czech literature suffered a lot after well-known events of 1968. At that time the communist ideology in Georgia became rather tolerant of literature and art generally, which enabled faster developments in literature, theatre and art. And Czech literature – with its great translatological tradition – again tried to fill in the void. Dr. Václav A. Černý – a Czech scientist, translator and expert in Georgian language and literature – translated 28 books by classical Georgian authors. His translations were awarded in Georgia.

In 1984 „Literary Georgia“, a magazine published in Tbilisi, celebrated a very important day: the Nobel Prize for literature awarded to Jaroslav Seifert. Few verses were translated (by G. Lezhava in cooperation with Kamil Chrobák, the editor of Odeon publishing house, who also wrote an article on Seifert).

New stage of these relations between free Czech Republic and Georgia at at he end of the 20th century is many-sided and very rich. In the future it will be necessary to study this period thoroughly.

References:
S. Čech: Druhý květ (Odlesky přítomnosti), Praha 1946, p. 108 and more.

I. Chavchavadze, Sruli krebuli. Tbilisi. Vol. VI. p. 126 and more.

G. Lezhava: Vybrané kapitoly z gruzínsko - českých literárních vztahů (Světová literárněvědná bohemistika, materiály kongresu), Selected chapters from Georgian-Czech literary relations. (World Bohemian Studies in Literary Science, papers from the congress, p. 63 and more, Praha 1995.

Anna Lobova: Language Interference in the Tbilisi Colloquial Georgian
This project is concentrated on sociolinguistic research of the Georgian spoken by inhabitants of Tbilisi and diglossia in this language from the point of view of using other language sources (ie. languages spoken by other ethnic groups living in Tbilisi) as stylistical, emotional and other means.
So far, the diglossia has been researched mainly within the Georgian language itself and primarily the interest of scholars concentrated on various territorial dialects and their characteristic features. At the same time linguists sought to describe urban language and based this description on material from Tbilisi, the city unique because of its multiethnic structure. This will be mentioned later. These descriptive works, however, concentrated on local colours of the past and reflect phenomena typical for the old Tiflis of the early 20th century. Quite naturally, since then life changed substantially and these changes have been especially fundamental since 1990s. New socio-political situation in Georgia led, among other, to increasing differences between standard and colloquial Georgian language. Into the latter, elements of professionals´ and generation slangs penetrated. This process is partly documented in the dictionary by Levan Bregadze Kharthuli žargonis lekhsikoni, published in 1999 (second edition in 2005). At the same time, Georgian started to replace Russian in the position of an interethnic communication language, which leads to emerging of various ethnolects and even idiolects. At present there is, in fact, no detailed work dealing with contemporary colloquial Tbilisi Georgian from the point of view of interference.
Uniqueness of the Tbilisi urban koiné is based on extraordinary language diversity: many languages contributed to and enriched local language situation. Besides Georgian they were mainly Russian, Armenian, Azerbaijani, Romany, Kurdish and Assyrian. In the last decade English also enters this group as a new quality. In our research we shall ignore old and mainly lexical loans from the mentioned languages, but will rather concentrate on synchronous analysis, ie. on language variants used by different speakers. We shall analyze communication strategies of Tbilisi inhabitants, namely of certain social groups: market vendors, car mechanics, workers at petrol stations, shoe repairmen and servicemen of cell phones, watchmakers, taxi and minibus drivers, etc. These are the very groups of Tbilisi inhabitants, who thanks to their ethnic – and also language - diversity switch their language code in everyday situations in rather dynamic way, ie. they use language variants and many loans from other languages; this depends on their ethnic origin and the language of a partner in a dialogue, on how the linguistic situation is or is not official, possibly also on how speakers tend to use certain stylistic and emotional nuances and on the topic of the dialogue.
During the first stage, material will be collected (notes and recordings of informants´ speech, questionnaires); this will be supplemented by statistical data obtained from institutions and non-governmental organizations. The second stage will be devoted to analyzing available data which will be confronted with influential works by European and American sociolinguistics (Labov, Ferguson, Hymes, Nekvapil). In the third and final stage we shall compare the Georgian situation with analogous language features of other countries, especially of the Czech Republic. The research will be complete after publishing a summarizing work and giving a lecture.
With speed of the linguistic changes and value of obtained material as compared to other linguistic regions, the suggested research is rather relevant now (the Czech situation is, for example, also characterized by diglossia, i.e. Czech language consists of the standard Czech and of so called „common Czech“). This analysis can also hint at perspectives of language planning in the environment with many linguistic minorities.
During the research we shall continue in the previous cooperation with the Slavistics Department of the Humanities Faculty, Tbilisi State University of Ivane Dzhavakhishvili, namely with professor Nathela Chokhonelidze who has studied interferences for a long time.

References:
Bakker, P.; Mous M., (edd.): Mixed languages. 15 case studies in language intertwining,

IFOTT, Amsterdam, 1994

Ferguson, C.A.: Diglossia, in: Giglioli, P.P.(ed.), Language and social context, 1972

Labov, W.: Sociolinguistic patterns, 1972

Thomason, Sarah; Kaufman, Terence: Language Contact, Creolization, and

Genetic Linguistics, University of California Press, 1988

Dešerijev, Junus Dešerijevič: O vzaimodějstvii drevněpis´mennych, mladopis´mennych i

bespis´mennych jazykov narodov Kavkaza; in Výprosy těorii i istorii jazyka

Izdatěl´stvo AN SSSR, Moskva 1952

Raznovidnosti gorodskoj ustnoj reči. Sbornik naučnych trudov; edd. D. N. Šmilev, J. A.

Zemskaja, Moskva 1988

Čanturišvili, D.: K voprosu o kal´kirovanii s russkogo na gruzinskij jazyk. Trudy

Batumskogo pedagogičeskogo instituta im. Rustaveli, sv. 5, Batumi 1956

Bolkvadze, T.: Tanamedrove kartuli ena sociolingvist´uri tvalsazrisit, Tbilisi 1997

Bregadze, Levan: Kartuli žargonis leksik´oni, Tbilisi 1999, 2. vyd. 2005

Philosophy and Religious Studies Section
Václav A. Černý: Paganism in the Caucasus
By „Paganism in the Caucasus“ we understand pre-Christian syncretic and mostly polytheistic religions, and religions influenced by Christianity or possibly also Judaism, Zoroastrianism and Islam, which emerged, developed and in some cases are still alive in the Caucasus itself as well as in the adjacent regions of Transcaucasia in the broader sense, i.e. approximately in the area between 45° and 30° northern latitude and 40° and 46° eastern longitude. In this region – measuring app. 1500 km north to south and 900 km west to east – the most important civilizations of eastern Europe and western Asia met and collided; this was the area of the so called Neolithic revolution, i.e. area of emergence of agriculture, beginnings of metallurgy and later also the place of the first ecological crisis when, after forests were cut, the region was drier, fields were less fertile and farmers had to move to higher elevations and switch to cattle breeding in summer pastures. This, however, was different in well irrigated southern Mesopotamia, which developed in the direction of city states (later kingdoms) with complex administration and therefore need of writing.

There is even a hypothesis claiming that this region was a nucleus where three important language groups originated and from where they spread: they were Indo-European, Semitic and Kartvelian (of southern Caucasus) languages; this hypothesis so far is not generally accepted - maybe because the supporting evidence is more readily available to linguists than to archaeologists and other historians; this, of course, does not mean, that it is possible to brush it aside completely.

All this, however, will only be dealt with in my work if there is some direct connection to my main topic.

The earliest information on the Caucasian paganism is brought by classical Greek historians and geographers, especially by Herodotus, Xenophon and Strabo, but some interesting data can also be found at writings by Apollonius of Rhodes; in ancient Rome they were Tacitus, Pliny and Ammianus Marcellinus.

The valuable source of information are also Georgian royal annals Kharthlis cchovreba (The Life of Khartli), especially books Matiane Kharthlisai (Chronicle of Kharthli), Cchovreba Kharthveltha mephetha (The Life of Georgian Kings) by Mroveli and Ninos mier Kharthlis mokhceva (Conversion of Kharthli by St. Nino).

It is an interesting coincidence that the first modern information on pagans in the Caucasus comes from two spies. The first was a certain Lyulye, who worked for the Russian ministry of foreign affairs. In 1857-1866 he was appointed in Cherkessia; in those years Russia was conquering this country. Most probably he was a Frenchman living in Russia (Dirr estimates original spelling of his surname as „L'Houlier“; so far I have not succeeded in finding his first name and date of birth, I only came across a mention that he died in 1862). This man was first to compile a Cherkess (also Circassian or Kabardian) language grammar book with rather basic dictionary; he was also the author of many ethnographic works. Today national Cherkess authorities made these texts available on internet.

The second spy, who brought important information on religious situation among Cherkess people, was an Englishman James Stanislaus Bell. He landed on the Caucasian coast with his ship Vixen in 1836. He declared his cargo as salt, but Russian authorities were convinced he in fact smuggled weapons and confiscated his ship. This event, by the way, irritated Karl Marx, who angrily informed his friend Friedrich Engels about it; both Lyulye and Bell in the Russian-Cherkess war indisputably sided the Cherkess people. In his book Journal of a Residence in Circassia during the years 1837, 1838 and 1839 Bell described many Cherkess religious ceremonies and to this detailed desription also added valuable comments. Selected passages from his book were published in Prague as early as 1842 in the anthology Taschenbuch zur Verbreitung geografischer Kenntnisse.

Only by the end of the 19th century and in early 20th century two excellent representatives of Georgian culture turned their attention to Caucasian and especially Georgian paganism.

The older of the two was a „Free Svan“ Besarion Nizharadze (1852-1919), an orthodox priest, journalist and amateur historian and ethnographer. His articles on various aspects of the Svan history, folklore and mythology were appearing in Georgian newspapers since 1882 till 1917. The Tbilisi University published them in two volumes in 1962 a 1964.

The younger was Vazha Pshavela (1861-1915), a Georgian poet and one of the greatest figures of modern Georgian literature. All of his poetry is based on the mountain people mythology, and thus on the phenomenon I describe as „east Georgian paganism“. In magazines he also published many articles on various ethnographical and folkloristic topics.

Only after these two amateurs specialized scholars appear.

The first was an academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, caucasologist (also linguist, archaeologist and ethnographer) of the Scottish-Georgian origin Nikolai Yakovlevich Marr (1864-1934); the second was his pupil and later collaborator, the Georgian historian Ivane Dzhavakhishvili (1876-1940), in 1917-1926 rector of the Georgian State University. In the first decade of the 20th century Dzhavakhishvili published a long work called Kharthuli c'armarthoba (Georgian Paganism). His teacher N. J. Marr reviewed this work which led to polemics between the teacher and his pupil. Marr praised Dzhavakhishvili´s work, but criticized him for confusing a part and a whole: D. used the title Georgian Paganism, while his work is in fact a very detailed and precise description of the so called „jafetic mythology“. Dzhavakhishvili defended himself rather angrily saying that nobody, and thus not even Marr himself, was able to define precisely this imaginary term of "jafetic", while the adjective "Georgian" has some existing content, because it describes the nation, which exists and is precisely defined as far as ethnicity and history are concerned.

Indeed, Marr used the word „jafetic“ on very many occasion without even trying to define this word precisely. Marr was romantic by nature and probably assumed that his originally intuitive idea will somehow become less vague over time, that its true nature and real existence will become apparent. In a way he was probably right. He considered Jezidism to be a form of the "Jafetic religion" (some authors went back to this concept of his as late as in 1960s – no that they defended his „Jafetic theory“, which in fact encompassed all existing languages and ideologies and tried to find some contents for it, but they rather wanted to explain similarities of phenomena, which at first do not look similar at all).

This work also goes back to this comparison, namely it deals with Jezidism in the context of Caucasian paganism, but using different principles and methods.

Coincidentally, there have lately appeared rather sober scientific works, which find some rational basis even in the Marr´s (seemingly) absurd theory of „four elements“ sal, ber, jon and rosh.

The study of the Causasian paganism was enriched in 1930s by large number of publications producing field material. For this work the most relevant are Aghmosavleth Sakharthvelos mthianethis tradiciuli sazogadoebriv-sakulto dzeglebi (Traditional social and worship heritage in mountain areas of the eastern Georgia), Tbilisi 1974, by V. Bardavelidze, monographs by S. Makalathia devoted to various mountain districts of Georgia and published in 1934-1968 and works by Al. Ochiauri on Khevsuretia published in 1938-1960.

The most important works on mythology of the Caucasian nations are pioneer writings by Vsevolod Miller called Osetinskije etjudy (1882) and mainly publications of an Ossetian scholar Vsevolod Abajev. The Cherkess (Adyghian ) ethnographer Áskar H'ādaghál'a wrote a monograph on the Cherkess Narty epos: Geroičeskij epos Narty i jego genezis, Krasnodar, 1967. Caucasian myths about Nartys were studied also by a French scholar George Dumézil, whose fundamental work on Nartys was published also in Czech in the first volume of his writings in the Prague publishing house OIKOYMENH in 2001.

Only short note on the latest publications: The most important of those are the work by a Georgian ethnographer Zurab Kiknadze - Kharthuli mithologia (Georgian Mythology) from 1996 -, a monograph by Dumézil´s pupil Georges Kharakhidze Le système religieux de la Georgie païenne from 2001 and several articles and papers by a Canadian caucasologist Kevin Tuite (first of those – a review of the mentioned work by Zurab Kiknadze – was published around 2002). Tuite´s work Real and imagined feudalism in highland Georgia is directly connected with our topic.

In case of such an obscure field of study as Caucasian ethnography and religions it is not proper to call for the research to be absolutely up-to-date. Nevertheless, the number of publications is surprisingly high in the last decade, which is a clear sign of growing interest about this topic among scholars and thus also of its current attractivity. Incidentally, works on this region can – in a certain aspect - be considered rather relevant also in generally accepted sense, i.e. the problems of Kurds which are rather burning today in Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria, problematic relationship of Sunnis and Shias, which today is very important in the much more widely defined region, and last but not least also problems of Chechens, Ossets and Abkhazians, which are now very alive not only in the Caucasus region but also within the whole Russian Federation.

As far as the working method is concerned, I suggest series of monographs on individual ethnical and historical regions, in which basic characteristics of their religions would be described and finally a comparison of them could be made.

Rather limited number of us, circassists (i.e. caucasologists specializing in the Cherkess language) means that almost all the colleagues know each other personally or at least have met on some conference in Tbilisi or elsewhere; we know about each other´s work and on every suitable occassion make cross references of our texts.


Lela Alexidze: Philosophy of Vojtěch Raňkov of Ježov
The main goal of the project is studying philosophical aspects in the writings by Vojtěch Raňkov of Ježov (Adalbertus Ranconis de Ericinio), a Czech theologian and philosopher of the 14th century. His work was published in 1970s by J. Kadlec (Leben und Schriften des Prager Magisters Adalbert Ranconis de Ericinio. Aus dem Nachlass von Rudolf Kolinka und Jan Vilikovský ed. Jaroslav Kadlec, Münster 1971.)

We shall concentrate on these fields:

1. 
   Interpretation of writings by ancient philosophers, namely Plato, Aristotle, Seneca and Boethius in the works by Vojtěch Raňkov of Ježov and evaluation of their importance for his theologian and educational work.
   
2. 
   What is the definition of philosophy and how Raňkov interpreted its relationship to theology.
   
3. 
   Vojtěch Raňkov was a Sorbonna rector; he lived and worked also in Oxford and Prague. The project aims to explain and compare educational systems of universities in Paris, Oxford and Prague at that time. What French and English university experience was especially important for Vojtěch Raňkov and what novelties did he bring from West European universities to the educational system of the Prague University and Prague Cathedral School.
   
4. 
   Last but not least: the project’s goal is also to compare interpretation of ancient Greek philosophy by Vojtěch of Raňkov with its interpretation in medieval Georgian philosophical and theological texts, especially in Ioane Petrici´s comment on Proklos Foundations of Theology, and also with how ancient Greek philosophers were interpreted in Byzantine texts of 11th to 14th century. Another comparison will be made of the role teaching philosophy had in Paris and Prague as compared to the Byzantine world and medieval Georgia.
   

Edition of the work by V. Raňkov of Ježov: Leben und Schriften des Prager Magisters Adalbert Ranconis de Ericinio. Aus dem Nachlass von Rudolf Kolinka und Jan Vilikovský ed. Jaroslav Kadlec, Münster 1971.

Tengiz Iremadze: Reception of the Bernard Bolzano´s Philosophy in the work by Shalva Nutsubidze
I. The planned research will be devoted to the hitherto unstudied field of the history of philosophy. So far we do not have any specific paper on how Bolzano’s philosophy was received in Nutsubidze’s writings. Existing studies only dealt with his philosophical and historical works. Even in voluminous anthology on the occasion of one hundred’s anniversary of Nutsubidze’s death there is almost nothing on this topic. Individual contributions mainly speak about Nutsubidze’s concept of the history of philosophy (e.g. about identification of Pseudo Dionysius with Peter Iber or about his widely discussed concept of the eastern renaissance) and ignore his autonomous teaching on truth (aletheiologia), which was strongly influenced by Bolzano’s concept of truth.

II. Bernard Bolzano and his (as Nutsubidze put it) "ingenious research" created bases for original theory of truth by Nutsubidze, which is introduced as a new philosophical branch: aletheiology. It is, therefore, necessary to treat concepts of truth by both philosphers in detail.

III. In his early philosophical years Nutsubidze devoted extensive monograph (Bolzano and Theory of Science, 1913 in Russian) to Bolzano´s teaching. Already in this work he presented his aletheiology. His method was similar also in his work Truth and Structure of Cognition, where he stressed Bolzano’s contribution and used it intensively. Bolzano, whose philosophy Nutsubidze incorporated into his way of thinking in such an extent, in his work Wissenschaftslehre discussed a concept of truth in itself in detail. Every science – claims Bolzano in Nutsubidze´s explanation – seeks to follow its own goals and tasks and this is the very reason, why we cannot have any concept of truth as such. Only philosophy succeeds in this and is, therefore, the science of all sciences because its task is to work out a general theory of science.

IV. The planned research, i.e. detailed analysis of how Shalva Nutsubidze interpreted Bolzano’s work, seeks to fill in the void in philosophical literature, namely absence of work on Bolzano’s reception in Georgia. During this project we shall analyze Nutsubidze´s writing devoted to the topic of Bolzano, mainly the philosophical/historical work Bolzano and Theory of Science. All important aspects of Bolzano’s Wissenschaftslehre, mentioned by Nutsubidze, will be analyzed thoroughly. Nutsubidze’s aletheiological works are also important for the overall picture of Bolzano, which Nutsubidze created. These will also be studied – if need arises.

V. Studying Bolzano’s picture in Nutsubidze’s work has until now been all but impossible in Georgia because of poor accessibility of the needed primary and secondary literature and up-to-date information on Bolzano’s work. Material from the Bolzano archive will be studied – and if needed then also analyzed – in order to decide about various topics. Results of the research will be presented to both Czech and Georgian public after the end of the project – in project’s proceedings. In popular form results will also be presented in lectures at Georgian universities. In enlarged and most up-to-date papers interpreting Bolzano´s work mentions about his reception by Shalva Nutsubidze have so far been absent. This situation will change if goals of this project are fulfilled.
References:

G. Tevzadze (ed.), Philosophy (On the occasion of 100 years since death of Shalva Nutsubidze), Tbilisi 1995 (in Georgian)

S. Nutsubidze, Bolzano i teorija nauki, Moskva 1913 (in Russian)

S. Nutsubidze: Works, Part I.: Bolzano and Theory of Science. Bases of aletheiology, publ. by S. Khidasheli, Tbilisi 1973. (in Georgian).

S. Nutsubidze, Wahrheit und Erkenntnisstruktur. Erste Einleitung in den Aletheiologischen Realismus, Berlin/Leipzig 1926.

B. Bolzano, Wissenschaftslehre, §§ 1-45, hrsg. von J. Berg (Bernard Bolzano-Gesamtausgabe, Reihe I: Schriften, Bd. 11, Teil I), Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1985, S. 103-176 (§§ 19-33).

Giorgi Kheoshvili: Konstantin Chkheidze and Prague Archive of N. F. Fedorov
Nikolai Fedorovich Fedorov (1829-1903) is a very interesting and important personality of Russian culture. His ideas influnced views of such people as Dostoevsky, Solovyov and Tolstoy. Well-known Russian religious philosophers of the 19th and 20th centuries – N. Berdyaev, S. Bulgakov, P. Florensky and others – analyzed Fedorov’s philosophical views and opinions. It is rather interesting that Fedorov was acceptable for Marxism – despite the totalitarian interpretation of reality and the fact that philosophy was attributed social function. Thanks to this his work was published and studied even during the Soviet era. In Georgia Fedorov’s religious/Utopian views were first received by an academician Othar Yioev (1928-1999). The work of this thinker was also studied by the proposer of this part of the project; the results are presented in his article Nikolai Fedorov´s Philosophy of Common Cause (see below).

Rather remarkably, in Bohemia Fedorov was popularized by a Georgian writer Konstantin Chkheidze (1897-1974), who founded and kept an archive on Fedorov in Prague and he also used ideas of this philosopher in his literary fiction. While in Bohemia he had in his time some readership, in Georgia he remained practically unknown – mainly because of his refugee’s fate.

The main goal of this project is studying of the Fedorov´s archive, which is now kept at the Literary Archive at Strahov in Prague, and evaluating Konstantin Chkheidze’s contribution as the founder of this archive. The second important part of the project will be studying the reception of Fedorov´s philosophy in the writings by Konstantin Chkheidze.
References:

Inventory LA: M. Bradová, J. Loužil: Fjodoroviana Pragensia, Praha 1962, edition inv. no. 42.

G. Lezhava: Czech writer of the Georgian origin (Konstantin Chkheidze), nov. Literaturuli Sakartvelo, 2000 (in Georgian).

„Staring in the Sun“. Scientific literary anthology on life and work of a Georgian prince Konstantin Chkheidze, the writer living in Bohemia. Ed. Vladimír Bystrov and Jiří Vacek, Praha 2002.

G. Kheoshvili: Nikolai Fedorov’s “Philosophy of Common Cause” in January 2007 (see Philosophy - Theology - Culture. Problems and Perspectives. Jubilee volume dedicated to the 75^th anniversary of Guram Tevzadze, ed. by T. Iremadze, T. Tskhadadze, G. Kheoshvili, Tbilisi 2007, pp. 431-442).


Cultural History Section
Vojtěch Kubec: Kapuchins from a Czech Province on a Georgian Mission

This project will concentrate on studying a small missionary community, its everyday life and methods of communication with local people and its European home – based on an example of Capuchin mission in a South Georgian town of Akhaltsikhe in the second half of the 18th century. At that time there were also brothers from the Czech Capuchin Province among monks.

Only recently has the Czech historiography shown renewed interest in missionaries. Older conclusions – rather exaggerated but still valid - by Zdeněk Kalista (pronounced in the introduction to the anthology „Journeys in the Name of Cross“) are gradually being revalued. During the German occupation (the book was published in 1941) Kalista saw missionaries as exemplary heroes who overcome obstacles and build new life. His concept is based on the well-known „approaching“ through „distance“; Kalista´s introducing essay in this anthology was preceded already in 1930s by papers of a Jesuit historian Josef Vraštil. But monastic historiography – however thorough and scientifically precise – could not be completely without certain idealization of the subject. Missionary activities were perceived as binding ideal and nobody cast any doubt as far as their authority was concerned. Conversely, after WWII scholars turned their interest from analyzing the very personality of the missionary to the object of his interest: Iberoamericanists (e.g. Simona Binková) concentrated on ethnographic and linguistic data on the Amazonian Indians and geographic discoveries of Czech missionaries; in case of an orientalist Josef Kolmaš it was rather Chinese astronomy and natural history as seen by a Czech Jesuit scholar Karel Slavíček; we now have catalogues of missionaries in the New World (Václav Ryneš in proceedings Ibero-Americana Pragensia 1971/5; Oldřich Kašpar: Jesuits from the Czech Province in Mexico, Olomouc 1999 – among other he describes everyday life of the mission). As recently as several years ago our geography was enriched by papers on Franciscan missionaries in Egypt and Ethiopia (Marek Dospěl, Josef Förster), which, however, concentrated mainly on the reception of ancient and contemporary life and overall situation. Apart from few mentions so far nobody has given attention to the Caucasus region.
In case of the Akhaltsikhe mission we have an interesting opportunity of studying a missionary community as seen by sources of various origins. On one hand we have missionary correspondence and response to it in Capuchin chronicles and documentation of the Congregation for Dissemination of Faith, on the other hand chronicles and other notes by local Georgian Catholics, who, at that time, were rather at the periphery of European culture. Quite frequently the same macrohistoric event is described in these two groups of sources in a remarkably different way. Systematic study and comparison of both will thus show different perception of local events by local people and foreigners from geographically and culturally distant areas. The goal should be a monograph on everyday life and communication strategies of the Akhaltsikhe missionaries; relevant material should also be published and translated. Gradually we shall concentrate on missionaries´ communication strategies towards local Georgian Catholics (ie. towards their entrusted spiritual community), Armenians (who were defined mainly by confession, in Akhaltsikhe not necessarily by language) and also towards Muslims, in whose case there was no sharp line as far as their national background was concerned; also towards local rulers (especially the Akhaltsikhe pasha and East Georgia king Erekle II.). Relations within the missionary community will not be ignored either (after some time two rival groups emerged: an Italian and that of missionaries from Austria-Hungary), as well as communication with home (Propaganda, Capuchin Centre, Czech Province Headquarters and monasteries, families, friends and patrons). The project will also include portraits of individual missionaries (their selection, preparation before leaving for the mission, the journey itself). Publishing „relevant documents“ means first publishing the most complete possible preserved correspondence of the Czech Capuchins with the province, Capuchin headquarters and Propaganda, and also the corresponding passages from the Capuchin annals of the Czech province, material documenting organizational and financial ensurance of the mission and second, publishing chronicle and amateur notes by Akhaltsikhe Catholics. Apart from some Georgian communication, this material will be made public for the first time. The edition will be commented – especially description of local phenomena in both Georgia and during the journey to the Georgian mission. The paper will have an introduction which will deal with the history of the Akhaltsikhe mission in the wider context of the then political and religious situation. During the first year of the grant we shall gather material from Czech and Georgian archives and libraries (First department of the National Archive, archive of the Czech Capuchin province, Historical archive in Tbilisi, Department of manuscripts and old prints of the Akhaltsikhe Museum); in the second year Roman archives (archive of monastic orders, archive of the Congregation for Dissemination of Faith) will be searched. Other research will probably be in the form of correspondence: we need to gather material on Austrian Capuchins, who also repeatedly worked at the Akhaltsikhe mission at the second half of the 18th century.
This project is a part of the renewed interest in the personality of missionaries in the beginning of modern era; this trend in the Czech historiography only appeared several years ago. Above all, it is necessary to mention a planned publication of monographs on Czech Franciscans Římař, Prutký and Schneider, who simultaneously worked in Egypt, Ethiopia and Palestine. Comparison with them would give us rather complex picture of a missionary and his views. At present there is not any study available on the Czech participation in the Caucasus Capuchin missions. This work also corresponds well with intensive interest of Georgian academicians in Czech culture and Georgian-Czech relations also from the historical point of view (for example, a Czech teacher should be engaged at the Tbilisi University and he or she should also have lectures on the Czech history and devote some attention also to the Georgian-Czech relations).
The basic research method will consist of assorting data from the source material into groups according to the various aspects of missionaries’ communication strategies and later of their analysis; other research will consist of microhistorical analysis of events documented in missionaries´ and Georgian sources and their comparison. The missionary will be studied as a person on the edge, who every day gets into extreme situations, which show clearly social and cultural edges of feasibility of certain activities and how certain ideas are or are not imaginable (Jan Horský: Historická antropologie a mikrohistorie. Interní tisk Filozofické fakulty Univerzity Karlovy; Historical anhropology and microhistory. Internal print. Philosophical Faculty of the Charles University). As a person who is ideal for microhistoric probing and study of individual mental dispositions.
References:

Shota Lomsadze: Gviani šua sauk´uneebis Sakartvelos ist´oriidan. Achalcichuri kronik´ebi.

(From the Georgian History in Late Middle Ages. Akhaltsikhe Chronicles) Tbilisi 1979

Shota Lomsadze: Samcche-Džavacheti. XVIII sauk´unis šuac´lebidan XIX sauk´unis

šuac´lebamde (Samcche and Džavašsko. Since 1750s till 1850s) Tbilisi 1975

Mikel Tamarashvili: Ist´oria k´atolik´obisa Kartvelta šoris. (History of Catholicism among Georgians), T´pilisi 1902

Michel Tamarati: L´église géorgienne des origines jusqu´a nos jours. Rome 1910

Antonín Vasiljevič Florovskij: Čeští jezuité na Rusi (Czech Jesuits in Russia). Praha 1941

Václav Rabas: Řád kapucínský a jeho působení v Čechách 17. století (Capuchin activities in Bohemia in the 17th century), Praha 1938


Marta Vaculínová: Image of Georgia in funds of the National Museum Library from 15th to 18th centuries
In our late medieval and early modern literature we can find basically two pictures of Georgia. The first – typical for the earlier period – describes ancient Iberia and Colchis mediated by the tradition of ancient Greek and Latin literature. The second already brings real contemporary Georgia as described according to some original reports or (and gradually this was the more common situation) as direct explorers´ and travellers´ experience.

As in case of many classical geographical terms, also Colchis and Iberia are often topoi. Colchis is mostly part of the Golden Fleece legend and is also present in the often staged and rewritten story of Medea. A good example of this image created by Czech sources is a short text preserved in the National Museum Library (NML) as a part of an unpublished manuscript by Matouš Philomates Dačický from 1574. Numerous examples of using these topoi can, of course, be found also in Latin poems by Czech humanists.

Georgia with its long Christian tradition is a much rarer theme. An exception in this is a medieval work by Haithon, an Armenian, which was aften published also in the 16th and 17th centuries along with Marco Polo´s Million and other travel literature. Mentions about „Georgians“ were quite common (for example Kryštof Harant wrote about his visit to a Georgian monastery), but otherwise there is hardly any knowledge, in texts of the period, about Georgia as the country inhabited by Christians. In the report on the defeat of the Ottoman army by Persians in the battle of Tbilisi in 1583, there is not even a mention about Georgians and Christians. Tbilisi itself is described as „a new fortress on the Persian front“. The event is seen through eyes of Europeans, who rejoice because of the defeat of their worst enemy: the Turks.

From 16th and 17th centuries we already have many topographies and descriptions of journeys and thus a reader of that time already had a better idea about Georgia than rather vague picture, which had prevailed in the early modern period until then. Georgia, however, still continues to be rather ignored by European writers. In written testimonies of the period – especially those on Persia – rather short description of Georgia usually contrasts with longer and better-informed passages on Armenia and neighbouring regions. It is also impossible not to notice stereotypes one author gives over to another (ever repeating notes about excellent wine and beautiful Georgian women). Nevertheless, authors also started to notice Georgian habits, writing and language and they describe different regions within Georgia.

Funds of the National Museum Library are very good base for the study of this topic. It will, of course, be necessary to study also funds of other Czech libraries and secondary literature, especially sources on travelling during early modern era. During preparation for this project we made a preliminary search in old prints on Georgia (last December in collections of Herzog August Bibliothek in Wolfenbüttel).

We shall study relevant literature written in Czech, which is well represented in collections of manuscripts and old prints of NML, and also literature in other languages – very good collections of topographies and journey reports can be found in Prague palaces libraries, which are managed by NML. Results of this project will be presented in the form of a clearly arranged paper and also as an exhibition.

So far this topic has not been treated in scientific literature. As a guideline and example of a non.Bohemical source we can mention an older monograph on Georgia reflected in Western European literatures: N. K. Orlovskaja: Gruzija v literaturach zapadnoj Evropy XVII – XVIII vekov, Tbilisi 1965.

2. Participants
Mgr. Marta Vaculínová, Ph.D. (National Museum) will be responsible for the organization and dissemination of the project. She cooperates with Dr. Tengiz Iremadze since 2005, and performed a journey to Tbilisi in February 2007 to arrange the project consortium. She studied Latin and Archival Sciences at the Philosophical Faculty, Charles University in Prague (FF UK) in 1988 - 1994. She finished her doctor degree in classical philology at the Masaryk University in Brno, Institute for Classical Studies in 2000. She received scholarship at the University of Konstanz in 1995 and as guest-researcher at Herzog-August Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel in 1995, 2005 and 2006. She works as head of the Department of Manuscripts and Old Prints of the National Museum Library in Prague since 1996. She is member of editorial board of Proceedings of the National Museum, Part C. She was contractor of the project supported by GACR entitled “The collected works of Bohuslaus of Lobkowicz and Hassenstein – poetry” in 2003 - 2005 (in cooperation with PhDr. Dana Martínková, CSc., the GACR official evaluation: excellent), currently she works on the project supported by the Ministry of Culture “Description of the Medieval Manuscripts in the Collection of the National Museum Library” (with M. Dragoun) and collaborates on the join research project of the National Museum “The personalities of the Czech Science and Culture”. She edited the poetical work by B. Hassensteinius (Bohuslaus Hassensteinius a Lobkowicz: Opera poetica. Ed. M. Vaculínová, Bibliotheca Teubneriana, K. G. Saur Verlag, München–Leipzig 2006), wrote about the manuscripts and old prints collection, published papers on the Latin literature of the early modern era in Bohemia. She participates on the exhibition on Hassensteinius and his time at the Prague Castle in spring 2007. She contributed to the jubilee volume edited by T. Iremadze with paper entitled An philosopho uxor ducenda. Development of the topic from late 15th century to early 17th century in Bohemia, exemplified by tractates, letters, poems and university disputes. In: Philosophy – Theology – Culture. Problems and Perspectives. Jubilee volume dedicated to the 75^th anniversary of Guram Tevzadze, edited by T. Iremadze, T. Tskhadadze, G. Kheoshvili, Tbilisi 2007, s. 154 – 170.
Selected bibliography for last 5 years:

The Incorrect Attribution of Aenea Silvio´s Poem “De passione Christi” to Bohuslaus of Lobkowicz and Hassenstein and Some Notes on Datation of His Printed Works, in: LF vol. 128, 1 – 2, p. 35 – 46.

Latinské průpovědi a citáty v památnících KNM, Folia historica Bohemica 22, 2006.

Humanistische Dichter Böhmens und ihre Präsenz in den gedruckten nicht bohemikalen Anthologien des 16. - 17. Jahrhunderts (accepted for Acta Conventus Neo-Latini Budapestinensis 2006).

Bohuslaus Hassensteinius a Lobkowicz: Opera poetica. Ed. M. Vaculínová, Bibliotheca Teubneriana, K. G. Saur Verlag, München – Leipzig 2006.

An philosopho uxor ducenda. Development of the topic from late 15th century to early 17th century in Czech lands, exemplified by tractates, letters, poems and university disputes.In: Philosophy – Theology – Culture. Problems and Perspectives. Jubilee volume dedicated to the 75^th anniversary of Guram Tevzadze, edited by T. Iremadze, T. Tskhadadze, G. Kheoshvili, Tbilisi 2007, p. 154 – 170.

OMNIA SPONTE SUA VENIANT: Emblém Jana Ámose Komenského a Poetika Marka Girolama Vidy. (accepted for the journal Umění).
Dr. Tengiz Iremadze (Savle Tsereteli Institut for Philosophy) will take care of organization of the project on the Georgian side. He studied Philosophy at the I. Javakhishvili State University Tbilisi (TSU) in 1993 – 1998. He finished his doctoral study of Philosophy at the Bochum University, Germany (doctoral scholarship DFG, Fakultät für Philosophie, Pädagogik und Publizistik der Ruhr-Universität Bochum), supervisor Prof. Dr. Burkhard Mojsisch. He obtained scholarships in Germany in 2004 - 2005 (Stiftung Weimarer Klassik, Herzog August Bibliothek). He is member of the Savle Tsereteli Institut for Philosophy in Tbilisi since 2004, since 2006 as head of Department for History of Georgian and Foreign Philosophy at the same institute. He reads lectures on History of Philosophy at the I. Javakhishvili State University. He is author of two monographs: Konzeptionen des Denkens im Neuplatonismus. Zur Rezeption der Proklischen Philosophie im deutschen und georgischen Mittelalter: Dietrich von Freiberg – Berthold von Moosburg – Joane Petrizi. Amsterdam/Philadelphia 2004, 275 S. Bochumer Studien zur Philosophie, Bd. 40. edited by: K. Flasch, R. Imbach, B. Mojsisch, O. Pluta; and Friedrich Nietzsche. „Also sprach Zarathustra“: Text und Kontext, Tbilisi 2006. He is editor of proceedings on philosophy and author of numerous papers in Georgian and foreign philosophical journals. Furthermore, he wrote about Nutsubidze: Das Vorlogische als Grundbegriff des Aletheiologischen Realismus: Schalwa Nuzubidse und seine neuen Denkansätze, in: T. Iremadze, U. R. Jeck, H. Schneider (editors), Philosophie im Dialog. Aufsätze zum interkulturellen Philosophieren: Deutschland–Georgien (in print).
Selected bibliography:
Monographs:

Konzeptionen des Denkens im Neuplatonismus. Zur Rezeption der Proklischen Philosophie im deutschen und georgischen Mittelalter: Dietrich von Freiberg – Berthold von Moosburg – Joane Petrizi. Amsterdam/Philadelphia 2004, 275 S. (Bochumer Studien zur Philosophie, Bd. 40. Herausgeber der Reihe: K. Flasch, R. Imbach, B. Mojsisch, O. Pluta).

Friedrich Nietzsche. „Also sprach Zarathustra“: Text und Kontext, Tbilisi 2006. (inGeorgian)
Editor:

Philosophy – Theology – Culture. Problems and Perspectives. Jubilee volume dedicated to the 75^th anniversary of Guram Tevzadze, edited by T. Iremadze, T. Tskhadadze, G. Kheoshvili, Tbilisi 2007.

Selected papers:

Der intellekttheoretische Ansatz der Selbstreflexivität des Denkens gemäß Kapitel 168 der Elementatio theologica des Proklos und seine Deutung sowie Entfaltung im Proklos-Kommentar Bertholds von Moosburg, in: W. Geerlings / C. Schulze (Hrsg.), Der Kommentar in Antike und Mittelalter, Bd. 2: Neue Beiträge zu seiner Erforschung (Clavis Commentariorum Antiquitatis et Medii Aevi 3), Leiden/Boston 2004, S. 237-253.

– Die Notwendigkeit einer prädikationslogischen Theorie des Seins. Untersucht am Beispiel von Petrizis „Proklos-Kommentar“, in: Mazne. Philosophische Reihe, № 2 (Tbilissi 2005), S. 119-122.

– Anfänge der Nietzsche-Rezeption in Georgien, in: Nietzsche-Studien, Bd. 35 (Berlin / New York 2006), S. 218-227.

– Die Rezeption der Aristotelischen Logik im georgischen Denken der Neuzeit: Anton Bagrationi und seine Aristoteles-Studien, in: Georgica. Zeitschrift für Kultur, Sprache und Geschichte Georgiens und Kaukasiens 29 (Aachen 2006), Shaker Verlag.

– Die Philosophie der Selbstreflexivität bei Joane Petrizi, in: Philosophy – Theology – Culture. Problems and Perspectives (Jubilee volume dedicated to the 75^th anniversary of Guram Tevzadze), edited by T. Iremadze, T. Tskhadadze, G. Kheoshvili, Tbilisi 2007, pp. 66-78.

Joane Petrizi, in: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Das Vorlogische als Grundbegriff des Aletheiologischen Realismus: Schalwa Nuzubidse und seine neuen Denkansätze, in: T. Iremadze, U. R. Jeck, H. Schneider (Hrsg.), Philosophie im Dialog. Aufsätze zum interkulturellen Philosophieren: Deutschland – Georgien (in print).

– Joane Petrizis Ansätze zur Philosophie der Selbstreflexivität. Zu ihrer Wirkungs- und Rezeptionsgeschichte im georgischen Denken des 17. und 18. Jh.s: Sulchan-Saba Orbeliani – Anton Bagrationi (in print).

PhDr. Václav A. Černý, CSc. studied Orientalism at FF UK, he began with Persian and history of Near East and finished with the combination of Armenian and Persian. He worked as editor after receiving his degree and then he was employed at the Oriental Institute of Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences. He received his CSc. (candidate of sciences) degree with the dissertation entitled Selected chapters from the circassian syntaxes, which was later recognized as PhDr. degree (doctor of philosophy). He was forced to leave the Institute in 1980. At the end of 1989 he was rehabilitated and reemployed at the Oriental Institute. However, he decided to work as freelancer. At this time he began to read lectures at FF UK on general Caucasology, Georgian, Armenian and Circasian. In recent years he organizes in-house seminars for a selected group of Caucasology and general linguistics students. He studied deeply the subject of the proposed project during the recent years and wrote five monographs on East Georgian heathenism, on Svans and Svanetia, on Cercechs and Yesieds, all of them are currently available in manuscripts. He travelled through the whole Caucasus, often as a guest of the Georgian Ministry of Culture and cultural institutions. In order to study Yesieds he arranged several journeys to Armenia, Germany and Syria. His translator activities were honoured with special Machabeli prize for translators. He translated tens of works by Georgian authors into Czech, wrote a brief textbook of Georgian and treatise of Georgian literature.
Prof. Dr. Lela Aleksidze

Education: 1977-1982 Department of Philology, Section of Classical

Philology. Tbilisi State University. Diploma. Subject of the work: Orpheus

and Orphism.

1985-1987 Postgraduate studies, Department of Philosophy, Chair of

History of Philosophy. Translation of the Pre-Socratic philosophers’

fragments into Georgian.

Academic Degrees: 1987: Candidate of Sciences in Philosophy (History of

Philosophy); Title of thesis: “Orpheus in Neoplatonism: Proclus’ Commentary

on “Timaeus”. Tbilisi State University.

1997: Doctor of Sciences in Philosophy (History of Philosophy). Title of

thesis: “Ancient Greek Philosophy in Ioane Petritsi’s and Ps. Maxumus’

Commentaries”. Tbilisi State University.

Academic Career: 1982-1987: Department of Philology, Tbilisi State

University (junior research scientist). Study of the medieval Georgian

manuscripts (Old-Georgian translation of the works of John Chrysostomos).

From 1985- till now: Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities,

Tbilisi State University (senior research scientist and lecturer, from 1998 -

professor). Study of Petritsi’s translation and commentary on the „Elements of

Theology“. Process of preparing of German edition of Petritsi’s work

(German translation with introduction, notes and index). Translation of

Athenagoras’ „The Resurrection of the Dead“ into Georgian, with

introduction and notes. Study of the Georgian Version of the Corpus

Dionysiacum. Translation of the Second Vaticanum into Georgian. Study of

the Byzantine commentaries on Proclus. From March 2006 till now: Senior

researcher in the Institute of Philosophy, Tbilisi.
Research Abroad: Leipzig – 1990-1991 (10 months, funded by DAAD),

Freiburg, Halle, Göttingen – 1993-1996 (funded by KAAD and EKD),

Giessen – 2000 (6 months, funded by the Union of the German Academies of

Sciences – Volkswagen Foundation), Giessen, Bochum - 2001-2002, Bonn

2005 (funded by Alexander von Humboldt Foundation), London and Oxford

2003 (funded by British Academy), Paris – 1999 and 2004 (funded by Maison

des Sciences de l’Homme), Princeton – 2005-2006 (funded by the Program in

Hellenic Studies, Princeton University).

Selected publications:

1. Griechische Philosophie in den „Kommentaren“ des Ioane Petrizi zur „Elementatio

theologica“ des Proklos. In: Oriens Christianus 81, 1997, p. 502-522.

2. „Bild Gottes“ in den Kommentaren des Ioane Petrizi zur „Elementatio theologica“

des Proklos. In: Stimme der Orthodoxie (Festschrift für Fairy von Lilienfeld) 3,

1997..

3. The Resurrection of the Body, Docta ignorantia and the Degrees of Knowledge in

the Commentaries on the Corpus Dionysiacum Areopagiticum. - In: „Mravaltavi“

(Philological-Historical Researches XVIII. Tbilisi 1999, p. 265-273 (in Georgian,

abstract in German).

4. Commentaires byzantins et commentaires géorgiens sur les „Éléments de

théologie“ de Proclus. In: XXe Congrès international des études byzantines. Pré-

Actes. III Communications libres. Paris 2001, p. 81.

5. Zum Verhältnis zwischen Neuplatonischem und Christlichem im

Prokloskommentar des Ioane Petrizi. In: „Metaphysik und Religion: Zur Signatur des

spätantiken Denkens“ (Beitrage zur Altertumskunde. Akte des Internationalen

Kongresses vom 13.-17. März in Würzburg). Saur München-Leipzig 2002, p. 429-

452.

6. The Divine Will (the „Paradigms“) in the Commentaries on the Corpus

Dionysiacum Areopagiticum. - In: Mravaltavi, XIX, Tbilisi 2001, p. 342-350 (in

Georgian, abstract in German).

7. Dionysios Areopagita in den mittelalterlichen Kommentaren zur „Elementatio

theologica“ des Proklos. - In: Selbst-Singularität-Subjektivität. Vom Neuplatonismus

zum Deutschen Idealismus. Hrsg. von T. Kobusch, B. Mojsisch, O. F. Summerell.

Amsterdam/Philadelphia 2002, p. 111-130.

8. Die Namenstheorie im sogenannten „Nachwort“ des Ioane Petrizi zur

„Elementatio“ des Proklos. - In: „Kaukasische Sprachprobleme“, Beiträge zu den

Kaukasistentagungen in Oldenburg 1995-2001. Hrsg. W. Boeder. Oldenburg 2003, p.

19-34.

9. Athenagoras of Athens: The Resurrection of the Dead (Georgian translation,

preface and notes). - In: „Emmaeus“. St. Ireneaus Biblical Theological Institute.

Tbilisi 2004 (2), p. 22-76 (in Georgian).

10. Concilium Vaticanum II (Constitutiones, Decreta, Declarationes). Translated into

Georgian. Tbilisi 2006.

Dr. Gjuli Ležava is bohemist dealing with Czech literature and Czech - Georgian literary relations. She studied English and Czech languages and literature at Institute for Foreign Languages in Tbilisi and took postgradual studies in Moscow. She worked as senior researcher at the Institute for Georgian literature with main research field in Georgian - Czech relations and translations. She was honoured with the Prize for the successful collaboration in the field of Czech - Georgian relations in the former Czechoslovakia in 1986. In 1996 she participated on research project of the Institute for Czech Literature in Prague financed by the Open Society Fund and realised a three month stage in the Czech Republic. She translates Czech literature and scientific publications into Georgian. She participated actively on the international bohemistic conferences. To the proposed topic she wrote e.g.: Česko-gruzínské literární vztahy. (Czech - Georgian Literary Relations.), in: Česká literatura 1989 - vol. 37(1), pp. 74 – 80. Kavkaz a Gruzie v některých českých pramenech (Caucasus and Georgia in some Czech sources), in proceedings of AVG “literaturuli dziebani”XXVI Tbilisi, 2005 (in Georgian).
Vojtěch Kubec (FF UK) represents the young incoming generation of Czech Kartvelologists in the project. He works in a tight contact with Georgian researchers. In 2004 during his lectureship in Tbilisi he worked together with Prof. Ramaz Kurdadze on analysis of Georgian annalistic writings from 18^th century. Since summer 2006 he is in touch with curators of the Museum in Achalciche, who intensively study the regional history of the early modern era. He studies since 2001 at the Department of Archives and Historical Sciences of the FF UK and writes his master thesis about the Franciscan missionary Christian Schneider in Egypt (supervisor PhDr. Zdeněk Hojda, CSc.). In summer semester 2004 he worked as lector of the Czech language at TSU an in State Institute for Economic Relations in Tbilisi. His publications to the proposed topic: O tom, kak slučilas´ smerť otca Alioza (Iz žizni kapucinov češskoj provincii v achalcichskoj missii vo vtoroj polovině XVIII v.) – How it happened, that Father Alioz died (From the life of Czech Capuchins in Akhalcikhe Mission etc.), in: Caucasian Messenger, Special Issue – History and Culture of the Caucasian Peoples 1: Anniversary Volume of Charles University in Prague and Tbilisi Ivane Javakhishvili State University Dedicated to the 75^th Birthday of Václav A. Černý; ed. by V. Kikilashvili, Tbilisi-Prague 2006, pp. 14-45.

Vivimus hic quasi extra mundo? Gruzínské písmácké zápisky z Achalciche (2. pol. 18. stol.) jako kontrapunkt k misionářským relacím kapucínů české provincie, in „Rýžoviště zlata a doly drahokamů” Sborník pro Václava Huňáčka (Jubilee volume for V. Huňáček), ed. V. Lendělová, M. Řoutil, P. Mervart, FF UK, Praha 2006, pp. 135-145.
Mgr. Аnna Lobova (FF UK) is bohemist and russist. Besides bohemistic themes she works on a methodical textbook of Russian specialised for Georgian-speaking users. In 2000 she finished her master degree at the Department of Slavonic Studies of TSU with thesis Comparative Analysis of Pronouns in Russian and Czech languages. Since 2006 she attends postgradual studies at Charles University in Prague, Dept. of Slavonic Studies of the Philosophical Faculty. Her thesis is focused on the language interferences on example of Russian by Tbilisi residents (supervisor Dr. Tatjana Loikova–Nasenko). Her paper for the republic conference of Russian on Analysis of the Text Structure. On the material of the romance by V. Nabokov “The Gift” was honoured with State Prize.
Dr. Giorgi Cheošvili

Education

1991-1996 I. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, The Faculty of Philosophy and Sociology

1996-1999 S.Tsereteli Institute of Philosophy Georgian Academy of Sciences, Post-graduate in History of Philosophy

Doctor of Philosophy (Thesis: “Vasilii Rozanov and Russian Philosophical Thinking”)

Work experience

1999 - 2005 S.Tsereteli Institute of Philosophy Georgian Academy of Sciences, researcher (Department of Philosophical Anthropology)

2003-2005 I. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, The Faculty of Philosophy (History of Russian Religious Philosophy)

2004-2005 Batumi, Sh. Rustaveli State University, the Faculty of Political Science and Philosophy (History of Russian Philosophy)

2006 - S.Tsereteli Institute of Philosophy, researcher (Department of Georgian and Foreign Philosophy)

Published scientific works

A list of main publications in the field during the last 10 years:

1. 
   Vasilii Rozanov // Apra, Tbilisi, 1998, N5.
   
2. 
   Z. Freud and V. Rozanov on Religion // Philosophical Investigations, XIV, Tbilisi 2001.
   
3. 
   The Problem of Religious Anti-Semitism in the 19-20th Century Russian Religious Philosophy // Matsne. Proceeding of The Georgian Academy of Sciences, Series of Philosophy, 2005, N 1, Tbilisi (in Georgian)
   
4. 
   Freud and Rozanov on Religion // Proceedings of the II Joint Scientific Conference. 2000, 24 November, 2001, Tbilisi (in Georgian)
   
5. 
   Rozanov, 2003, Tbilisi (in Georgian)
   
6. 
   Leontiev, 2003, Tbilisi (in Georgian)
   
7. 
   The Problems of Russian Religious philosophy (Rozanov, Leontiev, Bulgakov), Tbilisi 2006 (in Georgian)
   
8. 
   Nikolai Fedorov’s “Philosophy of Common Cause” // Philosophy - Theology - Culture. Problems and Perspectives (Jubilee volume dedicated to the 75^th anniversary of Guram Tevzadze), ed. by T. Iremadze, T. Tskhadadze, G. Kheoshvili, Tbilisi 2007 (in Georgian)
   
9. 
   Religious Anti-Semitism of S. Bulgakov, Jubilee volume dedicated to the 60^th anniversary of Michael Makharadze, ed. by T. Iremadze, K. Qetsbaia, Tbilisi 2007 (in Georgian)
   

Participation in grant projects

Georgian Academy of Sciences #20.2 - The Problem of Person’s Liberty in Modern Society, 2004-2005.