РАЗЫСКАНИЯ ПО ИСТОРИИ АБХАЗИИ/ГРУЗИЯ
INVESTIGATIONS IN THE HISTORY OF ABKHAZIA/GEORGIA
TBILISI
1999
saqarTvelos mecnierebaTa akademia
erovnul urTierTobaTa kvlevis centri
GEORGIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
RESEARCH CENTRE FOR RELATIONS BETWEEN NATIONS
The articles in the present collection deal with the Georgian-Abkhazian interrelations and cover the period from the most ancient times until the events that took place in the 1990s. They have been contributed by Georgian researches into the issues of political history, as well as into those of anthropology, archaeology, ethnology and history of culture.
The book is addressed to specialists and those interested in the above issues.
EDITORS: G.ZHORZHOLlANI
ED.KHOSHTARIA-BROSSET
This publication has been put out owing to a generous financial support of Acad. Zurab Tsereteli, full member of the Georgian Academy of Sciences, People's Artist of Georgia and UNESCO Ambassador of Good Will.
0503000000
p ___________
M607(06)-99
® „Metsniereba" 1999
ISBN 99928-51-55-4
SUMMARIES
Back:
http://www.geocities.com/komblege/kavta.html /5/ EDITOR'S NOTE
Georgian-Abkhazian relations have long been attracting the attention of researchers. However, this problem became particularly pressing in connection with the events in the recent years when the situation came to a head and, most unfortunately, exploded into a conflict aggravated by bloodshed in August 1992. The clash had been preceded by an "information /6/ war" that is being waged even today when historic reality is misinterpreted or falsified, and facts and events are treated with bias or are altogether distorted. The apologists for separatism allege that the Georgians and the Abkhazians never shared a common historic and cultural past and that the fates of these two peoples did not most intimately intertwine in the course of history, without bothering to try and prove what they say. It ought to be admitted that the reaction such spurious statements provoke with some GeorgicJi intellectuals, including scientists, is not always objective either.
It should be thought that seeking and finding the truth would play a prominent role in attaining mutual understanding which is a sine qua поп for a just and fair settlement of this conflict, and it is precisely for this purpose that the present collection of research papers has been put out. It serves academic interests, in the first place, and the Georgian researchers who have contributed their papers to this collection present their considerations concerning century-long Georgian-Abkhazian interrelations and arguments to support these considerations from a strictly scientific standpoint. These articles cover the period from the most ancient times until the events that took place in the 1990s and deal with political history, anthropology, archaeology, ethnology, culture; there is also an article that traces back the historical and political-sources and roots of the conflict in Abkhazia. The collection reflects the views that are prevalent in Georgian historiography, but that does not mean that the authors have similar positions on every issue. In a number of cases these positions radically differ from one another, especially when the ethnogenesis of the Abkhazian people is concerned. However, all Georgian scientists are in agreement that:
— historically, Abkhazia is an inseparable, a visceral part of Georgia;
— a shared historical and cultural commonality of the Georgians and the Abkhazians is an indisputable fact;
— the original Abkhazian ethnos (nation) took shape in the course of a single historical process involving both the Georgians and the Abkhazians within the framework of the Georgian state.
/21/ O.Djaparidze
THE ETHNO-CULTURAL SITUATION IN NORTH-WESTERN TRANSCAUCASIA IN THE STONE AND EARLY METAL EPOCH
Summary
Owing to its geographic position, North-Western Colchis had since earliest times been a link between Western Transcaucasia and northern areas of the Caucasus. Recent archaeological finds evidence than man had come to populate Transcaucasia quite early in the past. The Black Sea littoral and the adjacent coastal area of Western Georgia were the lands that hosted ancient man and where he eventually proliferated. North-Western Caucasus probably possessed favourable conditions for man to live and thrive.
Monuments of ancient epochs have been found here, the most noteworthy of them being anAcheullean station of ancient man known as Yashtkhva. Later on ancient man moved northwards — to the basin of the Kuban river.
The subsequent epochs - the Mousterian and upper Palaeolithic periods - saw a more vigorous spread of ancient man over North-Western Transcaucasia. Presumably, the Upper Palaeolithic epoch witnessed a dramatic cooling of the climate all over Transcaucasia, as well as in the entire Caucasus. So, ancient man had to seek other habitats with a more /22/ favourable climate. At the same time, the population of the Western Caucasus becomes denser, especially so in its north-western part and in the basins of the rivers Rioni and Kvirila. Quite well known in North-Western Colchis are the following Upper Palaeolithic sites: Apiancha, Svanta Savane, Tsivi Mgvime and other stations. At that time the population of the Caucasus, particularly in Transcaucasia was chiefly concentrated in Western Transcaucasia. This circumstance brought various groups of people together and promoted the formation of a homogeneous culture. It may be surmised that Western Transcaucasia was home to the all-Caucasian ethnic culture.
During the subsequent Mesolithic period the climate changed again and the present geological period - the Holocene epoch - set in. Monuments from mis time in North-Western Transcaucasia are well known: Kvachara, Apiancha, Djermukhi, Tsivi Mgvime, etc. The Mesolithic times saw the beginning of a large-scale proliferation of man throughout the Caucasus thanks to the now friendlier natural conditions, which process contributed to disintegration of homogeneous cultures. At mis time local variants of culture were formed in different regions of the Caucasus. The population infiltrated here mostly from Western Transcaucasia and its spread all over mis large territory was to contribute to the disintegration of the all-Caucasian ethno-cultural community.
The New Stone Age - the Neolithic - is one of the most significant epochs in the life of mankind, during which the foundation was laid for new forms of economy - agriculture and animal husbandry. Thhe Neolithic culture was to stem from the local Mesolithic bases. This is well evidenced by the monuments from North-Western Colchis -Apiancha, Tsivi Mgvime, etc. where Early Neolithic materials have been unearthed from under Late Mesolithic strata. Neolithic monuments are well known in mis region of Colchis - Gali I, Gumurishi, Chkhortoli, Kistriki (near Gudauta), etc.
This period could have perhaps seen the formation of a rather strong tribal organization. Late Neolithic sites are well known here, mostly in the coastal area - Machara, Gvandra, Guadikhu, etc. Quite noteworthy are the hoes of the so-called "Sochi-Adler" and the "Sukhumi" types unearthed chiefly in the coastal area between Gagra and Sochi. These hoes are traced back as originating from Western Asia where similar implements occur as used in the early stages of the development of agriculture. However, the form of these hoes could have well been evolved locally.
The transition to the new forms of economy caused a substantial growth of the population which doubtless pointed to the efficiency of the agricultural system. Settlement of the redundant population over a large territory contributed to gradual alienation of the people from one another which, in a certain measure, found its reflection in the material culture. By the close of the Neolithic period the cultural community loses its unity, and the process of disintegration of all-Caucasian community that had started as early back as during the Mesolithic times becomes still better expressed. We can make judgement of all these rather sophisticated processes proceeding from archaeological material that has been unearthed. In actual fact, material culture is the basic source of our information that can throw light on the ethno-cultural processes that took place in the Caucasus in the most ancient times. Other information, such as linguistic, or anthropological is practically absent.
It is almost impossible to say anything definite about the linguistic situation of the population in the Late Neolithic times. The disintegration of a single cultural community couldn't have failed to tell on the language the people spoke. The cultural peculiarities observable /23/ locally could have probably indicated disintegration of the ethno-linguistic community too. As far back as in the Mesolithic times dialectal groups of the all-Caucasian language began to drift apart from one another which, to a certain extent, was promoted by the geographic relief of the Caucasus. The linguistic community gradually loses its c ommunal character, and the all-Caucasian language gradually breaks up into so many related tongues.
It may be inferred that by the close of the Stone Age (7th-6th millennia B.C.) the Caucasian social and linguistic community fell apart. By this time the main ethnic groups of the ancient population of the Caucasus should have germinated: East Caucasian, West Caucasian and South Caucasian together with the delineation of the territories of their habitation. The north-western part of the Caucasus was mainly peopled by the parent Abkhazian-Adyghe population, the north-eastern part of the Caucasus gathered on its territory the parent Nakho-Daghestani community. South Caucasian parent Kartvelian tribes lived in Western Georgia and in the main areas of central Transcaucasia.
Thus, the turn of the epochs from Stone Age to Metal witnessed disintegration of the all-Caucasian community, and ancestors of all the peoples of the Caucasus came to the fore and occupied the historic arena here.
First human settlements on the territory of the Colchian Plain appear at the beginning of the Metal Epoch. Most noteworthy in its northern part are those at Ochamchiri, some remains of the stations at Machara, Gvandra and elsewhere. In the Early Bronze epoch the dolmen culture becomes widespread in North-Western Colchis. In the latter half of the 3rd millennium B.C. an original culture takes shape in Western Transcaucasia whose roots can be traced to the local Neolithic culture. No essential changes in the ethnic composition of the population are observable.
Issues concerning the origin of the most ancient population of the Caucasus and the primary areas of its habitation have long attracted the attention of researchers. Already ancient authors noted the patchwork fashion of the distribution of their contemporary Caucasian peoples over the territory of the Caucasus and located the areas of their original habitation somewhat further down south from where they live today. These views were shared by quite a number of prominent scholars. However, archaeological finds dramatically changed the idea of where the Caucasian peoples originally lived and the concept of their local origin comes to the fore. Issues of the ethnogenesis of the most ancient population of the Caucasus have long been the object of investigation of linguists. Despite the fact that studies of the Caucasian languages have a long history, scholars are still divided as to the kinship between these tongues. The thing is that genetic ties between the Caucasian languages go back into the most ancient past and their reconstruction is extremely problematic. However, it may be assumed that all the Caucasian languages take their origin from one parent language from which the Caucasian autochthonous languages stemmed and branched out later on. This process appears to have been quite long and complicated. As will be seen, differentiation of the all-Caucasian language began as early back as at the end of the Palaeolithic period, in the Mesolithic and in the Early Neolithic epochs.
There also exists another — an opposite view on the Caucasian languages which questions their kinship, particularly that of the Kartvelian and the North Caucasian languages. It is, doubtless, extremely difficult to judge of how true the picture of the remote past as reconstructed from linguistic data is, but early archaeological materials testify that it was the time when the Caucasus was an area of a gradual change of cultures. /24/
The surmise that the Caucasian tribes and, understandably, their languages penetrated into the area from outside does not seem to be sufficiently well founded. Even if we assume that these tribes had penetrated into the Caucasus from the south, they could not have found this area unoccupied or deserted, but, rather, they found themselves in a densely populated area with a rather developed culture, where the local ethnic element must have played a leading and determining role. Therefore, the view that Caucasian tribes are autochthonous appears more convincing. So all the basic Caucasian peoples must have shared a local ethno-cultural origin.
/41/ M.Baramidze
SOME PROBLEMS OF THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF WESTERN TRANSCAUCASIA IN THE 3rd - 1 st MILLENNIA B.C.
Summary
The outstanding success of the studies of the Early Bronze culture of Western Transcaucasia and the South Caucasus carried out over the last two decades (the settled sites at Dikhagudzuba I and II in Anaclias, and also at Ochamchiri, Nosiri, /42/ Saeliao, Machara, Guandra, Gumista I and II, Ispani, Pichori (layers VIII - VII) and elsewhere have enabled the researchers to identify two synchronous cultures on this territory: that of the Rioni-Kvirila rivers basin which was covered by the Kura-Araxes culture and that of the Early Bronze in the Colchian Plain that also covers Abkhazia. This culture is characterized by rough, hand-moulded grained pottery of the Ochamchiri type decorated with bands carved in relief, with riveted handles, cuneiform recesses, etc.
Also conspicuous are the vessels that are rather reminiscent of jars; these are pots, bowls, large pots and salt cellars. Quite specific are stone artifacts (hoes, grain grinders, pestles, flint arrow- and spearheads, flint blades mounted into the inner curvature of sickles) and metal articles (axeheads with a tubular shaft-hole to take the haft, hoes, flat axeheads). The identical material culture almost on the entire Colchian Plain permits us to regard it as a single culture. It should be noticed in this context that this single culture has peculiar features in the area north to the Gumista River, which is characterized by dolmen burials, where the sites are located on natural hills and where hoes of the Sochi-Adler type with gill-like shafts, pearl ornamentations have been unearthed. Owing to its geographical proximity to the cultures higher up to the north, this particular area was under greater influence of the Maikop-Novosvobodnenskaya culture.
An analogous picture is observable in the Middle Bronze period (the first half of the 2nd millennium B.C.) whose material culture is genetically connected with the previous time and repeats it in some way. Some forms and ornaments undergo changes (e.g. the long shafts, oval in the cross section, become shorter and flatter with a round lug); bronze hoes of the Ureki type with a triangular blade appear. These exceptionally close affinities between the materials from both periods enable the researchers to term this culture "Proto-Colchian" without, however, any ethnic implications, but with a view to recording the fact that this culture precedes the so-called "Colcho-Cholchian culture" that became widespread from the middle of the 2nd millennium B.C.
Interrelations between these two cultures constitute one of the basic challenges in the archaeology of Transcaucasia, the question being whether they are genetically connected with each other, or whether we deal here with a culture that naturally comes to succeed another one. There were attempts at tracing the genetic line of development, but none of them was sufficiently convincing. While the line tracing evolution of metal implements and weapons looks more or less acceptable, this cannot be said about pottery and ornaments, largely because no such artifacts belonging to the transition period from the Middle Bronze (Proto-Colchian culture) to the Late Bronze (Colchian culture) had by then been found.
Things have changed dramatically over the last decade. The Abkhazian archaeological expedition working at Pichori identified a separate layer (IV) as containing materials from both the Proto-Colchian and Colchian cultures. Analogous stratigraphy was registered at the Ergeta site and also at Anaclia and Namcheduri which had been studied earlier. Thus, the archaeologists were in a position to identify a whole layer containing mixed materials representing both these cultures. Notably, the character of the stratiography attests that the above /43/ cultures merged gradually, which is only feasible between related cultures. Chronologically, this process unfolded in the 16th-15th centuries B.C., and it enables researchers to both account for the differences between these cultures and indicate those similar elements and factors that link them together genetically (metal, pottery, architecture). All the above gives us sufficient ground to state that these cultures are closely connected with each other and were evolved by ethnically related and geographically close tribes.
The universally accepted theory classes Colchian culture with the Megrelo-Zanian ethnos. This vigorous culture that had taken shape in the southern part of Western Georgia and inAnatolia begins, from the middle of the 2nd millennium B.C., to gradually spread northward and crosses the river Enguri. From the beginning of the 1st millennium B.C. this culture proliferates still farther and over a greater area and comes to cover the entire territory of present-day Abkhazia, probably as far as the Sochi-Adler district.
According to the archaeological data, the proliferating Colchian culture could not help avoiding encounter with the culture of the ethnically related tribes. Otherwise abrupt substitution of one culture by another would be conspicuous.
The above-mentioned nature of the layers deposed in the course of the transition period indicated that the preceding culture could have only been evoked by a related ethnos from the Kartvelian (Georgian) group. This ethnos could have possibly comprised only Svanian speaking tribes who, in our view, lived in the Colchian Plain in the Early and Middle Bronze epochs. After gradual proliferation of the Megrelo-Zanian ethnos to the north, some Svanian tribes partially assimilated with the Megrelian ethnos, while the main bulk of these tribes moved to the highlands and started developing these territories. This process also had economic implications. In the Colchian Plain we find sites of advanced metallurgy and metalworking dating back to the 3rd millennium B.C. Using the ore brought over from the south slopes of the Greater Caucasus Mountain Range, the metal smelters and smiths fully met the local demand for their produce. From the latter half of the 2nd millennium B.C. and especially throughout the 1st millennium B.C. bronze metallurgy attains the peak of its development. Demand for copper ore grows which stimulates vigorous development of the Caucasian highlands in Racha, Svaneti and Abkhazian Svaneti - a fact corroborated by such burial grounds as those at Brili and Tli.
As mentioned earlier, part of the Svanian population stayed back and assimilated with the Megrelo-Chanians. This process may have found reflection in the ethnonym of the Svano-Colchians referred to by Claudius Ptolemy (Claudius Ptolemaeus, 2nd c. A.D.). Referring to Colchians ancient authors traditionally implied the ethnonym ofMegrelians and the emergence of such an ancient ethnonym may perhaps reflect the historic process which took place in the middle of the 2nd millennium B.C.
The material culture of Western Transcaucasia is closely linked with Georgian tribes (Megrelians, Svans). Yet it is noteworthy that the territory of Abkhazia lying north to the river Gumista appears as a local variant of a whole Colchian (or Proto-Colchian) culture which preserves its specificity throughout the centuries until /44/ late Mediaeval times. Only the south border of this local region varies sometimes.
Despite its local nature and only on a definite territory the material culture of Abkhazia features as an integral part of the Colchian (Georgian) milieu. We are inclined to support the hypothesis that part of the territory of present-day Abkhazia (the northern area) was populated by the tribes referred to in historic sources from the beginning of the Christian era. But these tribes had no genetic connections with the Abkhazo-Adyghe ones who, according to archaeologists, appeared in Abkhazia only in the Late Mediaeval period.
/58/ G.Giorgadze
NON-INDO-EUROPEAN ETHNIC GROUPS (THE HAITIANS AND THE KASKEANS) IN ANCIENT ANATOLIA ACCORDING TO HITTITE CUNEIFORM TEXTS
Summary
Hittite written sources from the 17th—13th cc. B.C. inform us that the Haitians were the most ancient non-Indo-European tribes that lived in Anatolia (Asia Minor) on the broad plain /59/ in the right-bank arch formed by the present-day river Kizil-Irmak (the Marassanta-Marassantia in the Hittite texts and the Halis in the classic epoch) and further up to the shores of the Black Sea also extending over the latest region of Pontus. The Haitians called their country "Hatti" and their language "hattili". Their capital city Hattush was located near the present-day Turkish village of Boghazkoy. Their large religious centers were Arinna, Nerik, Tsiplanta, Lakhsan and elsewhere which later became main religious centers of the Indo-European Hittites. The chief deities of the Hattian pantheon were the Goddess of the Sun, the God of the Moon, the God of Vegetation, The Goddess of the subterranean (nether) world. God Tsilipuri, God Tashkhapuna and others. The Haitian society may be described as an early class organization (the Haitians had a king and his queen styled as "Tabama" and "Tavannana" respectively. The texts also make mention of the "throne", "the Royal Prince", "warriors", etc. Judging by the archaeological data, the cultural level of the Haitians was rather high (they knew the technology of smelting iron from ore).
A number of researchers admit that the Hattians were an autochthonous tribe. However, the present stage of the development of Hittite studies gives some scholars grounds to conclude that the Haitians were not aboriginal tribes, but they, rather, may have moved over to the northern part of Central Anatolia either during or after Indo-European tribes had appeared in Asia Minor (around the middle of the 3rd millennium B.C.). Presumably, the Hattians came to Anatolia from the North-Western Caucasus — the abode ofAbkhazian-Adyghean tribes. This surmise is corroborated by a number of linguistic, archaeological and anthropological data.
Comparison of grammar forms seems to support the opinion thai "hattili"—the language of the Haitians, belongs to the family of ancient Caucasian languages. Its lexicon retains features that are common with West Caucasian languages. This was concluded after etymological studies and analysis of a number of Haitian words, although some of these words are guesswork. The most reliable linguistic material, based on phonetic affinities, gives the scholars grounds to regard Haitian as one of the most ancient Caucasian languages, which totally disproves the hypothesis advanced by a number of researchers who maintain that North Caucasian tribes originated from Anatolia.
Having moved over to Central Anatolia, more precisely — to its north and northwestern parts — the Haitians should, understandably, have established contacts with the aboriginal population of the area (of whom we know nothing so far) and also with their Indo-European neighbours who appeared in the south ofAnatolia after the parentAnatolian language had branched out from the parent Indo-European language (in Europe or in Nearer Asia). Presumably, the Haitian language had definite contacts with the Hittite and the Palaic languages and these links existed after (and not before) the differentiation of the parent Anatolian Indo-European language. The influence of the Haitian language on the third Anatolian Indo-European language — Luwian — cannot be proved. If Hattian had been in contact with that parent Anatolian Indo-European language, its impact, after the above differentiation, would have been reflected in the Luwian language too, but it is not the case here. Mutual contacts among the Hittites, the Palaic and the Hattians resulted in eventual merging of the Indo-European and the Hattian tribes. By the 18th century B.C. this process had been accomplished: the Hittites and the Palaite took the upper hand and the Haitians assimilated with them. The influence they exerted upon the Hittites found its expression in the religion, mythology and other social spheres. By about the middle of the 17th century B.C. the Hattians as an ethnic group had practically disappeared in Anatolia. Their language — Hattian —became dead and was resorted to by the Hittites when they needed to record religious texts, myths, etc.
During the existence of the Hittite state (17th—l 3th cc. B.C.) tribes of obviously non-Indo-European origin lived in the north and north-east parts of Central Anatolia, extending over the western portion ofPontus. These tribes are mentioned in Hittite and Assyrian texts as the Kaskeans. It is just this territory which used to be home to the Hattians.
Ethnic origin of the Kaskeans still remains unclear. Some scholars proceed from Kaskean /60/ toponyms (some of which are indeed of Haitian origin) and conclude that the Kaskeans were none other than Haitians or, at any rate, tribes closely related to them. These scholars also admit the possibility of a connection of the Kaskeans with the tribes in the North-West Caucasus. This influence is based solely on a phonetic affinity between the name "Kaskeans" ("Kashka") found in the Hittite texts and the name of the Circassian (Adyghean) tribe that sounds as "Kashag". However, mis supposition alone cannot serve as a solid confirmation of factual similarity between Kaskean and Circassian tribes, because researchers also observed the fact that the name "KaskeanA" as mentioned in the Hittite sources has phonetic affinities with the names of the tribes (or peoples) who lived in various other epochs and parts of the world — viz. in Africa ("Kaskeans"), in Europe ("Casca"), in Asia (Gashga) and elsewhere.
No other connections of the Kaskeans with the North-West Caucasus have so far been revealed and proved. Therefore, the supposition of the existence of their genetic links with theAbkhazo-Adyghean tribes seems hypothetical to us. More acceptable at mis junction is the view that the Kaskeans could have been genetically connected with South-Colchian (in particular, with the West-Georgian, i.e. Megrelo-Chanian) tribes that in the period of antiquity lived on the territory that neighboured on the eastern provinces ofPontus. This is provable by comparing the toponyms, proper names and some separate words of Kaskean origin with words of West-Georgian (Megrelo-Chanian) origin. It emerges that Kaskean words contain many toponyms, proper names and separate words that possess the structure of the Megrelian language, which should be regarded as indicative ofColchian rather thanAbkhazo-Adyghean origin of the Kaskeans (for greater detail see our article "On the Ethnic Origin of Kaskean (Kashkean) Tribes According to Hittite Cuneiform Texts", the "Artanudji" Journal, No. 10, Tbilisi, 1999 (text in Georgian). Widely current in special literature is the opinion that the terms "Kaskeans" in Hittite texts, "Kaskeans" in Assyrian sources and "Abeshia" in the Assyrian texts from the times ofTiglatpalasar I are variants. If this is true, our above opinion about the ethnic origin of the Kaskean tribes should then be taken into consideration.
If the Kaskeans, as mentioned in the Hittite texts, were tribes of South-Colchian origin, then the Kaskeans referred to in the Assyrian texts should also be regarded as being of this oitgin together with the Abeshlaian, because the terms "Kaskeans" and "Abeshla" that occur in the Assyrian sources are regarded as synonyms. It follows that in this case the "Kaskeans" from the Hittite and Assyrian texts and the "Abeshlaians" from the Assyrian sources should be regarded as tribes of South-Colchian origin.
However, if the terms "Kaskeans" and "Abeshia" and their synonym "Apsil" (as proposed by some scholars) are not variants of the same name (as presumed by us), then these terms should be considered as names of different, though closely related tribes of —predominanty West-Georgian origin, seeing that the version of South-Colchian origin of the Kaskeans does not seem to cause particular objections.
/88/ M. Inadze
PROBLEMS OF ETHNOPOLITICAL HISTORY OF ANCIENT ABKHAZIA Summary
The author makes detailed scrutiny of the information provided by Graeco-Roman and Byzantine sources and concerning the contemporary ethnic processes that went on then on the territory of present-day Abkhazia, as well as the ethnic composition of the population of this area at that epoch with a view to tracing back the ethnic origin of the Abazghis and then, upon subjecting the data thus obtained to critical analysis, to making an objective assessment of the scientific value of these data, together with the toponymic, linguistic and archaeological materials that have been revealed on the territory of Abkhazia over the last 50 years.
Studies of the data provided by Hecataeus of Miletus (6th c. B.C.) and Pseudo-Scylax ofCaryanda (4th c. B.C.) show that in the Early Antiquity both the foot-hills of Northern Colchis and the Black Sea littoral near Dioscuria (now Sukhumi) were populated by tribes of West Kartvelian origin (the Cols, the Coraxi), while the Colchians played a leading ethnic and political role. The archaeological materials provide clear evidence that in the first half of the 1st millennium B.C. Colchian culture extended over the population of Northern Colchis.
Ancient Greek authors say absolutely nothing about tribes ofAbkhazo-Adyghe origin living on the territory of Northern Colchis during the period when an ethno-political unity was formed with the Colchians at the head (6th c. B.C.). The first ever reference to numerous tribes living at the foot-hills of the Greater Caucasus mentions these tribes, describing them as the Sarmatians of the Caucasus; it was made by Strabo (1st c. B.C. — 1st c. A.D.). We are inclined to think that the term "Caucasians" also extended to cover ethnic groups ofAdyghe origin.
The present research offers critical analysis of the information gleaned from antique authors and concerning the Moskhs (Moschi) residing in Northern Colchis. The source of this information is to be found in the writings of several Greek authors: Helanicus ofMithilenus (5th c. B.C.), Palephatus ofAbydos (4th c. B.C.) and also in the works of the historians who made record of the wars waged by Mithridates. According to the above information, the Moskhs shared this area of habitation with other tribes (the Cerceti, the Heniochi, the Coraxi, etc).
The author feels that the mention of the Moskhs as living on this territory /89/ implies not the whole nation but, rather, separate ethnic groups that had immigrated to the area in question from down south, moving from Eastern Asia Minor toward the north-east and north-west after their vast political amalgamation had been decimated by the Urartians in the Pre-Antique period. With this in view, the area of their new habitation should be sought as localized in Northern Colchis at the foothills and not on the Black Sea littoral.
The author also considers issues connected with the ethnic origin of the Heniochi who, according to Artemidorus of Ephesus, occupied, in the 5th — 1st cc. B.C., the Black Sea littoral that is part of present-day Abkhazia:. - from the environs ofPitiunt or Pityus (Bichvinta) to the river Achaeuntus (the Shakhe river near present-day Tuapse).
The information we find in the works of Greek and Roman authors (Strabo, Pliny the Elder, an anonymous author, etc.) permits a surmise that the Heniochi were probably tribes ofSvanian and Megrelo-Chanian origin.
Sources from Late Antiquity evidence that by the 1st century A.D. the population living on the territory of present-day Abkhazia suffered dramatic ethnic and political changes which, on the one hand, may have been connected with a new influx of North Caucasian tribes, and, on the other, with the decline of the tribal unions that had thitherto existed in the area (including the Kingdom of Colchis) and the emergence of new ethno-political units.
Pliny mentions a new ethnic formation - the Sanigs, who appeared on the shores of Northern Colchis from the 1st century A.D. At some period this tribe is also mentioned as neighbours of the Heniochi, but from the 2nd century A.D. the Heniochi cease to be mentioned altogether in historical sources, and the principality of the Sanigs becomes predominant in the area under study.
Judging by the information we inherit from antique authors (Memnon, Flavius Arrianus, an anonymous author), the principality of the Sanigs was a rather considerable ethnopolitical unit that occupied a major part of the north-eastern littoral ofPontus. We may infer, therefore, that the population of the east part of the Sanig principality maintained closer contacts with the Svanian ethnic world and was closely related with numerous Svanian tribes who lived in the mountains above the city ofDioscuria which, according to Arrianus, was part of the Sanig principality, while the western part of the Sanig political unit incorporated Megrelo-Zanian tribes.
The 1st century A.D. witnesses an increased influx of Circassians andAdyghe into the eastern and western parts of the Sanig principality, which reflects on the toponymy of the north-eastern littoral of the Black Sea. Written sources from the 1st century A.D. also mention the Apsils as a tribe among the Sanigs and the Lazians. According to Pliny, the Apsils at that time were supposed to live in the gorge of the river Astelephos (Kodori) — an area with Tsebelda as its political center. At that time the city of Tskhumi (Sebastopolis) hadn't yet become part of the ethno-political area ofApsilia. Proceeding from the information provided by Memnon who mentioned only two ethno-political units in the north-eastern part ofPontus - viz. those of the Lazians and the Sanigs, one may infer that in the 1 st —2nd century A.D. the territory controlled by the Absils was located mostly in the interland and not on the littoral.
Ethnic provenance of the Apsils remains one of the most difficult and /90/
controversial issues in today's historical science. Some researchers are inclined to think that theApsils originated from the Adyghe, and support this inference by the coincidence of the root "aps" with the present-day self-name of the Abkhazians that sounds as "Apsua". But the suffix "iP in this particular case can only be connected with the East-Kartvelian suffix — "el" that indicated the place of origin of this or that subject, person or tribe. The stem "Aps" of the tribal name of the Apsils is also connected with the river Apsar (the present-day Chorokhi) mentioned by Pseudo-Scylax in the 4th century B.C. But here the name of the river has the ending —"ar" which, again, is a Kartvelian (Zano-Megrelian) suffix. The existence of such toponyms that carry Georgian suffixes makes doubtless evidence that by the time the Circassian-Adyghe ethnic groups began to penetrate into Northern and South-Westem Colchis, this area already had an indigenous population of both East- and West-Kartvelian origin whose toponyms eventually found their way into ancient Greek and Roman literary texts.
It should be surmised that a lengthy presence of the Apsils in the Megrelo-Chanian, Svanian and East-Kartvelian milieu, and their close interrelations must have exerted a powerful impact on their culture and language. It is not fortuitous that on their territory, that bordered on the Svanian world, many Georgian toponyms were registered by Byzantine authors: e.g. Cibelius (now Tsebelda), the political center of the Apsils whose name is clearly connected with the East-Georgian word "tsipeli" meaning a beech-tree.
In the southern part of the land controlled by the Apsils that bordered on the territory of the Lazians, these ethnoses lived together from the 1st - 2nd century A.D. under the influence of the traditions of the Colchian material culture and the social life of the West-Kartvelian population. TheApsils, partially mixed with the Lazians (or Egris) and were eventually involved in the political and cultural life of the entire country. That acceptance by the Apsils of the local Colchian cultural traditions becomes a determining factor of their further historic development together with the Lazians and their still closer rapprochement.
The process of assimilation and ultimate merging of the Apsils with the Lazians in the Black Sea littoral between the rivers Galidzga and Kodori becomes quite evident by the 6th century A.D. Besides other factors (cultural traditions, etc.), this process was also promoted by political subordination of the Apsils to the Lazians, by the 4th—5th century who, now strengthened by the latter, embraced Christianity together. All this still more vigorously contributed to still further and closer assimilation of these two tribes, while in the north-east some of the Apsils residing there merged with the Svans.
Beginning from the 5th century, theApsils evidently take advantage of the new influx ofAbkhazo-Adyghe tribes arriving from the north and weakening the Sanig principality, and seize its south-eastern part up to the fortress ofTrachaia (known as Anacopia in the Middle Ages). Now Tskhumi becomes a city of the Apsils-Apshils, and the Apsils thus become next door neighbours of the Abazghis.
The "Abasks" (Abazghis) are first mentioned by Flavius Arrianus (2nd century A.D.) as living in close neighbourhood with the Apsils and the Sanigs. We fully share the view of Acad. I.Djavakhishvili who inferred that the Apsils and the Abazghis used to live in the highlands of Northern Colchis. Svaneti and Skvimnia were thus located to the east of the area occupied by these two tribes. Seeing that the Abazghis are never mentioned (until the 2nd century A.D.) as residing anywhere on the north- /91/ eastern littoral of the Black Sea or in the foot-hills of Northern Colchis, we have every reason to suppose that ethnic groups oftheAbasks-Abazghis began to arrive and settle in this area only from the 1 st century A.D.
And Arrian's reference to the Abazghis whose ruler (prince) was raised to the dignity of'basileus" (king) by the Emperor Hadrian is yet another clear evidence of the fact that by the 2nd century A.D. the Abazghis had gained such a potential that the Roman authorities had to reckon with them. We surmise that the Abazghis were substantially strengthened by the so-called Abzoei ethnic groups who used to live in numerous tribes in the North Caucasus and who, described by Pliny as the "Abzoae" living in the North Caucasus near Meotida (i.e. the Sea of Azov), eventually came down from the mountains in the north. The Roman Empire could establish contacts and even obtain military reinforcements from the Abazghis who could provide them with men and cavalry units. Just such cavalry detachments of the Abazghis are mentioned in the "Noticia Dignitatum" which refers to them as "wings" detailed to fight cavalry forces of the Chans — tribes ofhighlanders living to the south of the Lazians.
According to contemporary written accounts, the Abazghis who were on the rise since the 2nd century A.D. gradually spread their political influence over the Sanig principality. Later on the political ascendance oftheAbazgis must perhaps be substantially promoted by the new influxes of highlanders from the North Caucasus who brought over and introduced at their new area of habitation new forms of economy (e.g. animal husbandry) and their own way of life (inroads and pillage).
From the wealth of information Procopius of Caesarea has left to us, the most interesting in this particular case is the fact that in the 6th century the Abazghis were not a politically and socially heterogeneous society. Outstanding from among them are two tribes ruled by their princes (or archons: the Western tribe and the Eastern tribe (Procopius of Caesarea. "The Gothic Wars"). The latter incorporated more or less socio-economically advanced Abazghis who lived mostly in the plain and had been professing Christianity for quite some time since its inception. The western tribe's territory (to the north of Pitiunt) was inhabited by the Abazghis who arrived here comparatively later and who were at a rather low level of social development (they still worshipped groves and coppices, sold children to slavery, etc. and the Emperor Justinian nearly had to resort to force to convert them to Christianity. If follows that the border between the above two Abazghi tribes seems to have followed the course of the river Abascos (now the Bzyb).
In the 6th—7th centuries, the Byzantine Empire tried to use the Abazghi principalities as a political force spearheaded against Lazica, and to this end it encouraged the Abazghi princes to enlarge their domains at the expense of neighbouring Svaneti that had thitherto been under Lazica "s sway. By the 7th—8th centuries A.D., the Abazghis seize some territories of the coastal Apsils, except the lands that were controlled by the tribe known as "Chach" that had apparently merged with the Lazians. Now Tskhumi, referred to in the early 8th century as a city of"Abshils" (Apsils) becomes anAbazghian city. Scholars believe that the "Chach" tribe was related to the Apsils and was simultaneously under a strong influence of the Lazians.
Thus, the Abazghis ("the Abkhazians" in Georgian) were characterized by ethnic mixture. They were not a monoethnos: those of them who lived in the plain typically /92/ mixed with the Kartvelian population (Sanigs, Moskhs), while highlanders merged with ethnic groups of Adyghe origin that periodically came down from the North Caucasus. The Abazghis also differed according to their economic activities. The plain dwellers were mostly engaged in agriculture and easily established feudal relations with Georgian feudal society, embraced Georgian culture, learned their spoken language and writing, their way of life, their religion which, on the whole, greatly contributed to their rapprochement and peaceful co-existence of these two nations. It was just this part of the Abazghi population that later played a leading role in breaking Abkhazia away from the Byzantine Empire and in the reunification of the now independent Abazghi Principality with the former Kingdom of Egrisi which resulted in the establishment of a unified West-Georgian kingdom, known in history as the Kingdom of Abkhazia.
/112/ N. Lomouri
ABKHAZIA IN THE LATE ANTIQUE AND EARLY MEDIAEVAL EPOCHS
Summary
In the first centuries of the Christian era the area from the river Galidzga to the river Shakhe was home to both Abkhazian tribes (the Apsils and the Abazghis) and Megrelo-Chanian (Colchian) and Svanian ethnic groups (the Sanigae or Sanigs and the Suanno-Colchians). At the same time, the Georgian (Kartvelian) population occupied a large territory that exceeded the area settled by the Apsils and the Abazghis.
Later on, consequent upon the rise of the Kingdom of Lazians (also known as Egrisi in Georgian sources) that occupied central areas of Western Georgia, the ethno-political map of North-Western Colchis underwent considerable changes: by the beginning of the 5th century, if not earlier, the borderline between the Lazians (or the Ergs) and the Apsils no longer followed the course of the river Galidzga, but was shifted to that of the river Kodori. The Apsils had been pushed by the Lazians up to the north, and the border between the lands of the Abazghis and the Apsils passed somewhat to the north-east of Sukhumi, around the course of the river Gumista. In their turn, the Apsils had pushed the Abazghis beyond the river Gumista onto the territory occupied by the Sanigs on the Black Sea coast between the rivers Shakhe and Psou; now the Sanigs found themselves squeezed between Abkhazo-Adyghe tribes - the Djiks from the west and the Abazghis from the east. We should have thought that the Svano-Colchians were partly with the Sanigs and partly with the Abazghis.
The rise of the kingdom of Egrisi and expansion of its territory began from the 3rd century. After the 4th century and until the sixties of the 6th century the territory of historic Abkhazia, i.e. the lands populated by the Apsils and the Abazghis and the maj or part of the territory populated by the Sanigs and the Suanno-Colchians were part of Egrisi. Among the tribes subjugated by the kings of Egrisi, contemporary written sources along with the Apsils also mention the Misimians who occupied part of the Kodori river gorge and were doubtless a Svanian tribe. It follows, therefore, that Svans lived in the Kodori gorge as early back as at the beginning of the Mediaeval epoch.
According to written sources, the dependence of different political formations on the territory of Abkhazia upon the king of Egrisi varied from tribe to tribe. Thus, the Abazghis had rulers of their own who were vassals to the king of Egrisi, while the Apsils and the Misimians /113/ were under his direct rule and their lands were provinces of this kingdom like the saeristavos in East Georgia. The process of breakaway from Lazica germinates as early as at the beginning of the 6th century. This movement was also encouraged and supported by the Byzantine Empire, the result being that in the middle of the 6th century. Abazghia declares itself an independent principality (Archontate), breaks away from Egrisi and becomes a province of the Byzantine Empire with a population comprising the Abazghis per se together with the Sanigs and the Suanno-Colchians. As for the Apsils and the Misimians (the Kodori Svans), they stayed under the king of Egrisi and when this kingdom was abolished early in the 7th century, they remained under the sway ofLaz Patricians. It was about the early 8th century, when the north-western part ofApsilia from the river Kelasuri to Anacopia (now Novi Aphon - New Ahos) uni tied with Abazghia.
The early 8th century also saw the formation of yet another political unit that was independent of Lazica and subordinated itself directly to the Byzantine Empire. Georgian sources called it the Saeristavo of Abkhazia, while Byzantine authors described it as the Archontate of Abazghia. The border between Egrisi and Abazghia-Abkhazia ran along the course of the river Kelasuri, roughly speaking. The Saeristavo of Abkhazia comprised, along with Abkhazian, also Georgian tribes, and the Georgian (Megrelian and Svanian) population, evidently predominant in that area numerically, occupied a leading position in significance and in its general share in the country. This conclusion is corroborated by the indisputable fact that Colchian (West-Georgian) culture was prevalent here since long ago, and that all over the Bronze, the Early Iron, the Antique and the Early Mediaeval epochs only Colchian material culture has been proved as flourishing on the territory of historic Abkhazia, characterized by definite local peculiarities but developing within the framework of unified West Georgian and from a definite time later - of general Georgian culture. Analysis of architectural monuments, archaeological finds, the linguistic and religious situation of the Early Mediaeval period allows us to conclude that despite their origin both the Apsils and the Abazghis were, in ethnocultural terms, an integral part of Georgian ethnic unity, such as the Egrs, the Svans, the Kakhis or the Meskhis.
Some Abkhazian researchers (Z.Anchabadze) put forward a hypothesis that the ethnic base of the Abkhazian Saeristavo was "the unified Abkhazian ethnos that had resulted from consolidation of separate Abkhazian tribes and small nations". This hypothesis caused objections on the part of other scholars (N.Berdzenishvili, E.Khoshtaria-Brosset). We cannot agree with it either, because the Early Feudal epoch did not offer any objective conditions, any pre-requi sites for Abkhazian tribes to consolidate into a nation.
These tribes did not have any tradition of statehood, of a state with a spoken and written language of its own; in other words, they did not have even the necessary minimum of the components that are required as a basis, as a pre-requisite of consolidation of any tribe or tribes into a nation. On the contrary, that period offered every condition for integration of all these tribes into a single Georgian people. Thus, though the establishment of the Archontate of Abkhazia (or the Abazghian Saeristavo) contributed to the unification of the Apsils and the Abazghis, it did not at all mean that the given feudal unification was ethnically separate to any extent. Neither its ethno-cultural character, nor the level of its social development differed it in any manner from other saeristavos of Georgia. And this situation precisely accounts for why the Abkhazian Eristavis seceded from the Byzantine Empire, rallied around themselves the whole of Western Georgia and proclaimed themselves "Kings of the Abkhazians". The state they thus created was, in all parameters, not an Abkhazian, but a Georgian kingdom. The issue of the essential nature of this state cannot be disputed in serious historic science and cannot have an alternative solution. Leon II (Leon I of the newly established kingdom) was styled "King of the Abkhazians" because his dynasty originated from Abkhazia, although it is hard to say who were the eristavis or archons of Abkhazia by their ethnic origin: they could /114/ have well been representatives of the local nobility — i.e. Abazghis, Apsils, Sanigs, — or Byzantines. But that does not make much matter, the main thing being what the kingdom under them was like. The character of the "Abkhazian Kingdom" is pretty clear: the majority of its population was made up by the Georgians. Now this new kingdom comprised Svaneti, Racha, Lechkhumi, Mingrelia, Upper and Lower Imereti plus Guria and Adjaria. All these lands had a Kartvelian population: Megrelians, Svans, Karts and, as mentioned earlier, Abkhazia proper had a considerable percentage ofKartvelians. Judging by the culture, the state language and the language of the church, as well as by the policy pursued by the "Kings of Abkhazia", the "Kingdom of Abkhazia" was actually a Georgian state formation. Understandably, this formation took an active part in all the political developments of the time which resulted in the formation of a unified Georgian kingdom, a Georgian feudal state.
Thus, neither in the Antiquity, nor in the Early Feudal epoch was historic Abkhazia an independent state, and Abkhazian tribes never had a statehood of their own. Abkhazia was a visceral part of Kartvelian state formations — first Colchian, then Laz (Egrisi), later the so-called Abkhazian Kingdom and finally, from the close of the 1 Oth century, it became part of the unified Georgian kingdom and until the late Middle Ages it remained as just another administrative unit like other saeristavos of Georgia. The involvement of the Abkhazians into the process of consolidation of the Georgian nation contributed to further integration of the Abkhazian tribes into the Georgian ethnic milieu.
/151/ D. Muskhelishvili
THE HISTORIC STATUS OF ABKHAZIA IN GEORGIA'S STATEHOOD Summary
Ancient Greek sources unequivocally indicate that in the 1 st millennium B.C. the territory of present-day Abkhazia was part of the West Georgian Kingdom of Colchis, inhabited by Georgian tribes (Coraxi, Cols, Colchians and others), while the cities ofDioscuria (now Sukhumi) and Pitiunt or Pityus (now Pitsunda) were in the area inhabited by Colchians.
Later on, in the 1 st—2nd centuries A.D., Apsils and Abasks believed by some scholars to be ancestors of the present-day Abkhazians are first mentioned as living on this territory. Apsils are, indeed, one of West Georgian tribes. As for the Abasks, there are no sufficient grounds to regard them as direct ancestors of today's Abkhazians despite the close affinity of the ethnonyms "Abask" and "Abkhaz". Later on, from the 4th century, these tribes, together with Misimians — a tribe of Svanian origin—were subjects of the Kingdom ofLazica/Egrisi that was established on the /152/ territory of ancient Colchis. Over the 4th—5th centuries all these tribal unions were under the cultural influence of their overlords who had embraced Christianity in the early 4th century.
Formally a vassal of the Byzantine Empire, the Laz Kingdom (the Kingdom of Egrisi, or Lazica) was actually an independent country that strove for full independence. Vying with Iran in Transcaucasia, the Byzantine Empire sought to spread its influence over the North Caucasus too, and was, therefore, interested in controlling the policy pursued by Lazica and took efficient measures to that end. It was just for this reason that in the 20s of the 7th century. Emperor Heraclius II placed Abkhazia — one of the provinces of his vassal kingdom—under his direct rule and appointed his viceroy (archon) to that province with the seat in Anacopia (now Novi Aphon - New Athos), whom Georgian historic ssources refer to as the "'Eristavi (military ruler) of Abkhazia".
This marks the beginning of the rise of the "Saeristavo of Abkhazia", directly promoted by the Byzantine crown, which encouraged territorial expansion of Abkhazia that in the 6th century occupied the territory between the rivers Gumista and Mzymta and, spreading both eastward and westward, comes to possess the lands stretching from the river Kelasuri to the estuary of the river Kuban (by the 30s of the 8th c.). Thus, Abkhazia annexed some part ofApsilis in the east and a substantial portion of Zikhia in the West.
By that time all Georgian feudal culture that stemmed from the potent socio-economic base of Eastern Georgia attained a rather high level. This culture had been vigorously spreading in Western Georgia over the centuries where it successfully rivaled with Greek Orthodox Christianity that conducted the divine service in the Greek language which the local population did not understand. Powerful spread of Georgian culture extended over the north-western provinces of Georgia — the territory of Abkhazia. This is corroborated by the construction, from the 6th century, on, of Georgian churches which, ipso facto, presupposes the existence of Georgian Christian communities on the territory of Abkhazia and is indicative of a vigorous spread of Georgian feudal culture and the Georgian language (in opposition to Greek). This active process resulted in apostasy of the Abkhazian Eristavi Leon I, a viceroy of the Byzantine Emperor in Abkhazia, also renounced Greek orientation and became a vassal of Archil — the "Erismtavari (Supreme Ruler) of Georgia". Since then (i.e. since the 40s of the 8th century on), Abkhazia finally becomes an visceral part of the political, social and cultural world of Georgia. Supported by Georgian political circles the feudal lord of the Abkhazians Prince Leon II unites the whole Western Georgia in the 70s of the 8th c. And in the 790s he assumes the title of King of the Abkhazias and becomes actually fully independent.
An outstanding Georgian political and cultural figure, Leon II moved the capital to Kutaisi which was then the centre of Georgian culture, and the Holy See of the Catholicos of Abkhazia was moved to the Bichvinta Cathedral (at Pitsunda).
Over the 9th—10th centuries Leon IPs successors continued the construction of the Georgian state in political and cultural terms: they founded new monasteries /153/ and established new bishoprics, promoted the development of Georgian writing and actually joined the political struggle waged by other principalities with a view to unifying entire Georgia.
Georgian culture was meanwhile embraced not only by the Abkhazian nobility, but also by the grassroots. Since then, from the viewpoint of the Georgian feudal culture, the Abkhazians became Georgians, very much like Gurians, Megrelians, Svans, etc. And it is precisely for this reason that the ethnonyms "Abkhaz", "Abkhazia" and "Kartveli" (Georgian) became synonyms over the period when Georgia was a united feudal monarchy (11th—15th cc.). Abkhazia was its integral part, just the same as Kakheti, Guria, Odishi (Megrelia), Svaneti and other provinces.
After this united monarchy fell apart into separate kingdoms and principalities which took place at the close of the 15th century due to ceaseless difficulties in its relations with foreign powers, Abkhazia remained under the sway of Odishi, which, in its turn, was loyal to the King of Imereti (Western Georgia). In the 17th century, the Princes Sharvashidze, the feudal lords of Abkhazia, succeeded in becoming practically independent monarchs, although formally they still remained vassals to the Prince of Odishi. The border between these two principalities still passed along the course of the river Kelasuri, coinciding with the ethnic line of division between the Megrelian and the Abkhazian population. Incidentally, the latter had, by that time, undergone substantial demographic changes.
The point at issue is that as the united Georgian monarchy was gradually suffering ever-increasing political weakening and by the close of the 15th century totally collapsed as a single state, an intestine struggle among feudals aggravated by incessant invasions and inroads from outside, brought the once vigorous economy of the Georgian Kingdom to total ruin and dramatically reduced the population in the central plain areas of Georgia. In Abkhazia the population dwindled too. Understandably, all these circumstances provoked aggressive activities of Caucasian highlanders who started to descend from the mountains and settle in the plain area of Georgia.
This tendency developed all over the Caucasus and became known in Eastern Georgia as the so-called "Lekianoba" — infiltration of the Lezghins and the Ossetians into Transcaucasia from the north. Western Georgia and, particularly, Abkhazia saw the penetration of various North Caucasian Adyghe and Abazin (Apsua) tribes who brought along with them primitive feudal patriarchal social relations typical of the highlands and totally alien to the indigenous population raised in the traditions of ancient Georgian feudal culture. Thus, the formation of the present-day population of Abkhazia on the above territory (up to the river Kelasuri) took place mainly as a result of the merge of the Abazins-Apsuawho had descended from the North Caucasus with the indigenous population of Abkhazia. The Georgians have preserved their tribal name as the Abkhazians, while their self-name remained "Apsua".
In the subsequent centuries the principality of Abkhazia never featured as a whole single state. The arrival of the tribes of highlanders broke the territory of the principality into numerous semi-feudal and semi-patriarchal tribal units headed by petty princelings permanently at variance with one another. /154/
From the 1760s the entire Western Georgia and, particularly, Megrelia was in the death throes of feudal anarchy. In the 1780s the Abkhazians-Apsuas turned this situation to their advantage, invaded the north-western part of Megrelia, decimated the indigenous population and seized the territory up to the river Enguri, whose course marks the border between Abkhazia and Megrelia to this day.
After the annexation of Georgia by the Russian Empire in 1801, the new administration reunited (in 1805) some of the territories between the rivers Enguri and Galidzga captured by the Abkhazians-Apsua with Megrelia (the principality of Odishi) and in 1810 the whole of Abkhazia was armexed by Russia. In 1864, the Imperial Government abolished the principality of Abkhazia and all its territory became part of the Kutaisi Gubernia.
/173/ М. Lordkipanidze
THE KINGDOM OF ABKAZIA
Summary
The Kingdom of Abkhazia was established in Western Georgia at the close of the 8th century. Unification of Georgian lands with subsequent establishment of a single state was a process that took several decades and was conditioned by a number of internal and external political circumstances.
The striving to become a single state is traceable throughout the entire history of Georgia, but the natural historic process of consolidation was more often than not impeded by unfavourable political developments both at home and abroad. /174/
In the wake of the victories won by the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius (610-641) in his warfare against Iran, Transcaucasia and, particularly, Georgia found itself under the political influence of the Byzantine Empire which created favourable conditions for reunification of Georgian lands. But from the middle of the 7th century. Transcaucasia became an area of interests of the Arab Caliphate whose policy was aimed at disintegration of vanquished Georgia, The Byzantine Empire that also suffered defeat after defeat at the hands of the Caliphate tried to consolidate her position by encouraging Christian countries in their struggle against the Arabs.
Under such circumstances, the ongoing expansion of the Saeristavo of Abkhazia that absorbed the neighbouring Sanigeti, Apshileti, Misimianeti and other ethno-political units of Western Georgia proceeded if not with help, then with tacit consent of Constantinople. Since then the implication of the toponym "Abkhazeti" (in Georgian written records) and "Abazghia" (in Greek sources) began to broaden and extend over the territories annexed to the Saeristavo of Abkhazia.
Prince Archil —a Royal prince of the ruling dynasty of KartIi —whose native Kartii was then under Arab domination, was de facto Eristavt-Eristavi of the former Kingdom ofEgrisi and he married off his niece (daughter of his late brother Myr, King of Egrisi) to Leon the Abkhazian and passed over to him the crown of Egrisi; all this happened with the consent of the Byzantine Imperial court.
Leon I remained a vassal to the Empire, and so was later his nephew and heir (son of his brother) Leon II who in due time inherited both Abkhazia and Egrisi. At the close of the 8th century Leon II took advantage of the differences that were plaguing the Empire and, with the help of the Khazars, he broke away from Constantinople and assumed the title of King. Abkhazia and Egrisi were united
აფხაზეთი, ტკივილი ჩვენი!
