Forging of Georgian Identity in the Nineteenth Century: Contribution of Ilia

Abstract

Georgians have many very outstanding  writers and public figures, but all point to the exceptional merit of Ilia Chavchavadze to the Georgian nation. The question arises: did Ilia do something superior to others? Why is he the only one called the "Father of the Georgian nation"?

The answer to this question requires an explanation of the concept of a nation and the essence of the nation-building process. During the Soviet period, Georgian historians based their representation of the nation-building process exclusively on the Stalinist definition. This definition is essentialist: it excludes the role of the subjectivist factor in the formation of the national we-group; the importance of the activity of the we-group members in the formation of the nation is not implied. In Western scientific discourse, the essentialist approach to groups has been largely rejected and it is believed that the subjectivist factor is of great importance in the process of nation-building, in particular, the involvement of the cultural elite in this process is considered crucial: the cultural elite of the we-group creates the ideology/identity narrative of nationalism necessary for national consolidation and, through the media of the modern era, ensures the circulation of this narrative in the we-group standing on the path of national consolidation.

The national idea leads to the mobilization of a group and, therefore, the formation of a nation. Nationalism is an ideology of solidarity, it is a phenomenon of modern times, despite the fact that ideologies of solidarity (in the form of ideologies of ethnic choseness or missionism) existed in the pre-modern era, their social impulse was weaker than the ideology of nationalism due to the social heterogeneity of pre-modern ethnic units. When discussing the characteristics of the ideology of nationalism // national identity narrative as a discourse, it is worth noting a fact that was found out   by the prominent researcher of the nation phenomenon, A.D. Smith. He showed that, despite variations in different environments, the ideology of nationalism has stable and unchanging universal characteristics.Therefore, nation-building everywhere proceeds according to approximately the same scenario, and the actions of the leaders of the national movement are determined by these universal canons. The structure of identity narratives is also uniform: in all cases, this is a discourse on topics of existential importance for the nation. These topics can be grouped around three main questions: “Who are we?”, “Who were we?”, “What is our destiny?” All three questions are closely related to the fundamental ideals of nationalism.

All the texts created by Ilia and all his actions as a leader are interconnected and serve to implement the fundamental ideals of nationalism. For example, Ilia's interest in the issues of abolishing serfdom and ensuring harmonious coexistence of ranks, and bringing women into the public arena was conditioned by the desire to erase the internal group divisions of the Georgian we-group and strengthen social bonds. This should ultimately lead to the homogenization of Georgian unity and, accordingly, the formation of a national identity.  The same purpose was served by Ilia’s conceptualization of “others,” for example, the West. Ilia’s attitude towards the West was ambivalent: on the one hand, it aroused his admiration, but on the other hand, Ilia also pointed out the shortcomings of the West. The West played the role of a model in the process of national consolidation of Georgians, but the superiority of the model should not be suppressed by national self-esteem. Ilia conceptualized the “West” with completely different themes, for example, even with such a seemingly distant issue as the rules for setting wine in Georgian.

With the discourse on wine, Ilia was showing that at that stage, despite the obvious cultural superiority of the West, there was something important that no one could compare to the Georgians in doing. It was also a way to highlight the cultural autonomy and uniqueness of the Georgians. Ilia's great interest in the historical past of Georgians is connected with the ideal of self-reliance of the ideology of nationalism.. He believed that the memory of living together was more important than anything else, even clan or ethnic origin. An analysis of Ilia's work shows that he created a very detailed Georgian national identity narrative. He was certainly not alone, and the entire Georgian cultural elite was involved in this great creative act, but Ilia was the mastermind in this matter. Taking into account the entire Georgian historical experience, he made the greatest contribution to the formation of the idea of ​​the Georgian nation and helped to imbue Georgian unity with this idea.

The intensive circulation of the national idea within the Georgian we- group was served for three decades by the main Georgian print  media of the nineteenth century, “Iveria,” which was published through Ilia’s efforts and ultimately united Georgian society into a single entity. Considering this unprecedented merit, it can truly be said that Ilia Chavchavadze is the Father of the Georgian nation.