Read SympCatalogue2008.pdf text version

vaxtan beriZis saxelobis qarTuli xelovnebis g saerTa Soriso simpoziumi

qarTuli xelovneba evropisa da aziis kulturaTa konteqstSi

21-29, ivnisi, 2008 saqarTvelo

Tezisebi

Vakhtang Beridze International Symposium of Georgian Art

Georgian Art in the Context of European and Asian Cultures

JUNE 21-29, 2008, GEORGIA

ABSTRACTS

Tbilisi

2008

TBILISI

gamomcemeli: xelovnebis saerTaSoriso centri saqarTvelo, Tbilisi, 0108, n.nikolaZis 7 el-fosta: [email protected] www.gaccgeorgia.org proeqtis avtori da xelmZRvaneli maka dvaliSvili, xelovnebis saerTaSoriso centri saredaqcio sabWo: dimitri TumaniSvili, Tavmjdomare g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri; Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia ana kldiaSvili, g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri, Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia ana SanSiaSvili xelovnebis saerTaSoriso centri, Tbilisis saxelmwifo universiteti mixeil abramiSvili, saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi - Tbilisis arqeologiuri muzeumi nana kupraSvili, Tbilsis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia nino RaRaniZe, g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri, Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia katalogis koordinatori: ana SanSiaSvili, xelovnebis saerTaSoriso centri Targmani: ana SanSiaSvili, naTia miqelaZe, nino kitovani, nino mataraZe, irina mebuke, lado mirianaSvili inglisuri teqstis koordinatori: sara bolsoni, kolumbiis universitetis Teachers College, aSS dizaini da dakabadoneba: gega paqsaSvili foto ydaze: daviT garejis monasteri. berTubani XIII s.

Published by: Georgian Arts & Culture Center 7, N.Nikoldaze str., Tbilisi, 0108, Georgia e-mail: [email protected] www.gaccgeorgia.org Project Leader Maka Dvalishvili, Georgian Arts & Culture Center Editorial Board: Dimiti Tumanishvili, Chairman G. Chubunashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection, Tbilisi State Academy of Arts Anna Kldiashvili, G. Chubunashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection, Tbilisi State Academy of Art Anna Shanshiashvili Georgian Arts & Culture Center, Tbilisi State University Mikheil Abramishvili, Tbilisi Archaeological Museum of Georgian National Museum Nana Kuprashvili, Tbilisi State Academy of Art Nino Gaganidze, G. Chubunashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection, Tbilisi State Academy of Art Catalogue coordination: Anna Shanshiashvili Georgian Arts & Culture Center Translation: Anna Shanshiashvili, Natia Mikeladze, Nino Kitovani, Nino Mataradze, Irina Mebuke, Lado Mirianashvili English text coordinator: Sara Bolson Teachers College at Columbia University, USA Design and typesetting: Gega Paksashvili Photography on the cover: David Garedji Monastery. Bertubani 13th. c

dabeWdilia: Printed in: © Georgian Arts & Culture Center 2008 © Authors 2008

2

Sinaarsi

misalmeba nikoloz vaCeiSvili. saqarTvelos kulturis, ZeglTa dacvis da sportis ministri ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10 maka dvaliSvili. proeqtis avtori da xelmZRvaneli, xelovnebis saerTaSoriso centri ------------------------------------------------------------- 11 simpoziumis organizatorebi -----------------------------------------------------------------------14 simpoziumi madlobas uxdis ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 15 winaTqma dimitri TumaniSvili. g. CubinaSvilis saxelobis qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri, Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia -- --------------------------------------------------- 19 Teimuraz sayvareliZe. g. CubinaSvilis saxelobis qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri -----------------------------------------------------20 I. seqcia uZvelesi saqarTvelo AG. nino jayeli. uZvelesi samkauli da xelovnebis sxva nimuSebi ZuZuanis mRvimis zedapaleoliTuri Zeglidan (dasavleT saqarTvelo) -------------------------------------- 23 nino SanSaSvili. giorgi narimaniSvili. mesopotamiis kulturuli interaqtivoba samxreT kavkasiaSi adre brinjaos xanaSi ------------------------------------------------------ 24 zurab maxaraZe. xelovnebis nimuSebi cixiagoris mravalfeniani Zeglidan ------------- 24 karen rubinsoni. TrilaeTis Tasisa da sarwyulis kuftiniseuli analizis gadafaseba Tanamedrove Teoriisa da arqeologiuri codnis fonze ----------------------------------- 25 ana kldiaSvili. gamosaxulebaTa semantika da samyaros modeli winaqristianuli xanis qarTul kulturaSi ---------------------------------------------------25 mixeil abramiSvili. CaTalhuiukidan sveticxovlamde - amonaridebi xaris kultis xangrZlivi istoriidan --------------------------------------------------------- 26 goderZi narimaniSvili, kaxa ximSiaSvili. TrialeTis brinjaos xanis namosaxlarebi ------26 qeTevan ramiSvili. cxenis gamosaxulebebi Zvel saqarTveloSi da mecxeneobasTan dakavSirebuli saxelwodebebi qarTulSi ---------------------------------- 27 nino gomelauri. saqarTvelo da evrazia Zv.w. II-I aTasw-Si brinjaos mcire plastikis mixedviT ----------------------------------------------------------- 28 manana wereTeli. kolxuri saritualo culi /semantika da mxatvruli stili/ ----------- 29 ori soltesi. "qarTulobis" Camoyalibeba uZveles xanaSi ---------------------------------- 30 vaxtang SatberaSvili. minis ori moxatuli WurWeli sofel xovledan --------------------30 Tamaz sanikiZe. kldis qalaq ufliscixis istoriis ZiriTadi etapebis Sesaxeb -----------31 mariam gvelesiani. yaTlanixevis anTropomorfuli figuris interpretaciisaTvis -------32 Teimuraz bibiluri. apolonis taZari did mcxeTaSi ----------------------------------------- 33 amiran kaxiZe, maikl vikersi. aTenisa da kolxeTis savaWro-ekonomikuri da kulturuli urTierTobani klasikur xanaSi (saqarTvelo-britaneTis fiWvnaris erToblivi arqeologiuri eqspediciis masalebis mixedviT) ------------------------------- 33 nino ZnelaZe. berZnuli moxatuli keramika fiWvnaridan ----------------------------------- 34 Tamar SalikaZe, tariel ebraliZe. gonio-afsarosis savaWro ekonomikuri da kulturuli urTierTobani dasavleT xmelTaSuazRvispireTTan ------------------------- 34 3

merab xalvaSi. fiWvnaris importuli amforebi -----------------------------------------------35 irine varSalomiZe. romauli monetebi gonio-afsarosidan ---------------------------------- 35 SoTa mamulaZe, emzar kaxiZe. afsarosi - romauli kulturis centri aRmosavleT SavizRvispireTSi -------------------------------------------------------- 36 II. seqcia Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo MD kristofer haasi. ioane zedazneli: qarTveli wmindani siriul asketur tradiciaSi ------- 52 aleqsei lidovi. aRmosavleT-qristianuli "gamosaxuleba-paradigma": hierotopuli ganzomileba Sua saukuneebis xelovnebis istoriaSi ---------------------------------------- 52 ekaterine gedevaniSvili, marine yenia. sityvisa da gamosaxulebis urTierTmimarTebis sakiTxisaTvis Sua saukuneebis qarTul kedlis mxatvrobaSi ------------------------------- 53 ori soltesi. "raindobis" xelovneba da misi konteqsti ------------------------------------ 54 mariam didebuliZe. saero tendenciebi Tamaris epoqis kulturaSi da Tanadrouli kedlis mxatvroba ------------------------------------------------------------ 54 pavlos florentosi. bizantiuri mozaika da kedlis mxatvroba kviprosis taZrebSi -------55 aleqsandra davidov temerinski. esqatologia, ideologia da konteqstualizacia: saSineli samsjavros scenebi deCanSi, axtalasa da timoTesubanSi ------------------------ 55 ida sinkeviCi. freskuli xatebi qarTul da bizantiur monumentur xelovnebaSi: maTi arsi da mniSvneloba -------------------------------------------------------- 56 irine mamaiaSvili. postbizantiuri mxatvrobis tendenciebi XVI s-is qarTul monumentur mxatvrobaSi ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 57 beatriCe tolijiani. qarTuli gavlenebi grigol bakurianisZis mier bulgareTSi, plovdivis maxloblad daarsebuli monastris negebobaTa fasadebis morTulobaSi --------- 57 Tamar xundaZe. istoriul pirTa gamosaxulebani Sua saukuneebis (VI-XI ss.) qarTul xuroTmoZRvrul qandakebaSi ---------------------------------------------- 58 ekaterine kvaWataZe. XI saukunis Semdgomi periodis qarTuli Sua saukuneebis safasade skulpturis ZiriTadi tendenciebi ---------------------------------- 59 peter grosmani. romauli da gvianromauli elementebi egviptis adreqristianul arqiteqturaSi saqarTvelos viTarebasTan SepirispirebiT ------------------------------- 60 jon vilkinsoni. sad Caisaxa qarTuli eklesia? ----------------------------------------------- 61 irine giviaSvili. qarTuli mravalafsidiani eklesiebi ------------------------------------- 61 qeTevan abaSiZe. safasade qvis wyoba qarTul saeklesio xuroTmoZRvrebaSi ------------- 62 daviT xoStaria. tao-klarjeTis arqiteqtura: istoria da Seswavlis perspeqtivebi --------- 63 bruno baumgartneri. ucnobi da naklebad cnobili qarTuli Zeglebi Crdilo-aRmosavleT TurqeTSi ---------------------------------------------------------------- 63 markus bogiSi. ramdenime SeniSvna istoriul taoSi (Crdilo-aRmosavleT TurqeTi) mdebare oSkis taZris "Cawerili jvris" tipis ZiriTadi nawilis Taobaze ---------------- 64 nato gengiuri. qarTuli eklesiebis karibWeebi (adreqristianuli periodidan ganviTarebul Sua saukuneebamde) ----------------------------------------------- 64 irma berZeniSvili. afxazeTis adre Sua saukuneTa saeklesio xuroTmoZRvreba ------------- 65 edit noibaueri. Sua saukuneebis qarTuli arqiteqtura da skulptura da romanuli periodi centralur evropaSi -------------------------------------------------- 66 veronika kalasi, iavuz ozkaia. qarTuli aspeqti XIII saukunis anis arqiteqturaSi: tigran honencis taZari da minuCiris meCeTi ------------------------------------------------- 67 rozmeri beisiki. saqarTvelo da xorvatia: saerTo wyaros magaliTi ----------------------68 leila xuskivaZe. ornamenti Sua saukuneebis qarTul WedurobaSi -------------------------68 4

maria lidova. liturgiuli sivrcis Seqmna: ioane cohabis mier Sesrulebuli sinuri xatebis jgufi ----------------------------------------------------------- 69 nana burWulaZe. qarTuli xatebi sinas mTis wm. ekaterines monasterSi (qarTulbizantiuri urTierTobebis istoriisTvis) -------------------------------------------------- 70 aleqsandre saminski. berTis saxarebis miniaturebi da misi warmomavloba ----------------70 nino qavTaria. XII-XIII saukuneebis qarTul oTxTavTa gaformebis mxatvruli aspeqtebi ------- 71 lali osefaSvili. qarTul liturgikul gragnilTa mxatvruli gaformebis Taviseburebani (XII-XVI ss) ------------------------------------------------------------------------72 izolda meliqiSvili. qarTuli saeklesio samosis ferisa da formis simbolikis sakiTxisaTvis ---------------------------------------------------------- 73 sastendo moxsenebebi --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 93-94 III. seqcia modernizmi saqarTveloSi MIG gaston buaCiZe. qarTuli ferwera evropis konteqstSi: firosmani, lado gudiaSvili, daviT kakabaZe ---------------------------------------------------------------96 giorgi xoStaria. binaruli opozicia niko firosmanaSvilisa da modernizmis mxatvrobaSi ------------------------------------------------------------------------96 liana anTelava. samyaros sivrce/drois kontinualuri modeli qarTul mxatvrobaSi ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 97 marina meZmariaSvili. firosmanis Semoqmedeba evropuli modernizmis CarCoebSi ------------- 98 nana yifiani. "poeturad binadrobs adamiani" ------------------------------------------------- 98 ana SanSiaSvili. niko firosmanaSvilis ferwera XIX s-is bolosa da XX s-is dasawyisis evropuli mxatvrobis konteqstSi --------------------------------------------------------------------- 99 nestan TaTaraSvili. evropuli kulturuli memkvidreoba - modernis stilis arqiteqtura saqarTveloSi ------------------------------------------------------------100 maia ciciSvili. eqspresionizmidan ,,dada"-mde 1910-1930-iani wlebis qarTul mxatvrobaSi (axlad aRmoCenili masalis safuZvelze) -------------------------------------- 101 irine abesaZe. qarTuli modernizmidan - transavangardamde, anu, kidev erTxel, terminTa definiciis Sesaxeb --------------------------------------------------------- 102 Tea tabataZe. modernistuli artistuli kafes zogierTi Taviseburebis gansazRvrisaTvis. ,,qimerionis" moxatulobis ideur-Sinaarsobrivi metyvelebis Sesaxeb ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 103 mzia CixraZe. futuristuli wigni, Tbilisi 1910-1920 --------------------------------------- 104 nino zaaliSvili. 1920-30-iani wlebis qarTuli grafikis zogierTi tendencia ------------- 105 qeTevan SavguliZe. montaJis principebi qarTul scenografiaSi (1920-iani wlebi) ------------- 106 Tea uruSaZe. konstruqtivizmis Tavisebureba qarTul Teatralur-dekoraciul xelovnebaSi -------------------------------------------------------- 107 sastendo moxsenebebi --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 118 IV. seqcia restavracia /konservacia;qveseqcia: biodazianebebi kulturul memkvidreobaSi maia SaviSvili. sarestavracio saqmianobis zogadi mimoxilva ------------------------------120 sabina vedovelo. saziaro proeqti ------------------------------------------------------------- 120 erik viurgeri. istoriuli nagebobebis saZirkvlebis gamagrebis axali meTodi -------------- 121 mark gitinsi. qarTuli kedlis mxatvrobis sami nimuSis konservaciisadmi meTodologiuri da praqtikuli midgoma-------------------------------------------------------122 5

nana kupraSvili. gelaTis RmrTismSoblis taZris XII saukunis moxatulobaTa teqnika --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 122 julia kaneva. kedlis mxatvrobis biodazianeba ---------------------------------------------- 123 Tomas varSaidi. biodazianeba kedlis mxatvrobaSi -------------------------------------------124 franCesko imperi. uZvelesi kedlis mxatvrobis "gavardisfrebis" etiologia: molekuluri midgoma -------------------------------------------------------------- 125 nino kitovani. informacia ubisis didi karedis saTave xatis kvlevisa da konservaciis meTodis Sesaxeb ---------------------------------------------------- 125 darejan gogaSvili. xelnawerTa erovnul centrSi daculi papirusebis konservaciis zogierTi sakiTxi ---------------------------------------------------------------- 126 mari-klod depasio. restavracia Tu konservacia, ra avirCioT? --------------------------- 127 nino kalandaZe. arqeologiuri brinjaos konservaciis meTodi vanis naqalaqarze aRmoCenili masalis mixedviT ----------------------------------------------------128 Tea kinwuraSvili. vanis minebis skanirebis eleqtromikroskopul-energodispersiuli analizi, rentgeno-flurescenciuri gamokvleva da restavracia-konservacia ------------------- 129 sastendo moxsenebebi --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 139 V. seqcia kulturuli turizmi knut gerberi. kulturuli turizmis ekonomikuri efeqtis Sesaxeb - SesaZleblobebi metia Tu riski? ---------------------------------------------------- 141 beTsi haskeli. turizmi saqarTveloSi --------------------------------------------------------- 142 paata SanSiaSvili. saqarTvelos turistuli konkurentunarianobis gazrda daculi teritoriebis qselis Seqmnis meSveobiT ----------------------------------- 142 niko kvaracxelia. saqarTveloSi kulturuli turizmis ganviTarebis tendenciebi da perspeqtivebi ------------------------------------------------------------------ 143 doroTea papaTanasiu-zurTi. transinterpret II: memkvidreobis interpretacia, rogorc gza multisensoruli gamocdilebisaken. saberZneTis magaliTi; "proeqti "herodote": istoriuli garemos tursituli gamoyeneba. nou-haus da xarisxis menejmentis praqtika regionul doneze". TanamSromlobis qseli regionuli TviTmyofadobis da kulturuli memkvidreobis popularizaciisaTvis ------------------145 mine kadiroRlu. kulturuli turizmi tao-klarjeTSi ------------------------------------ 146 maka dvaliSvili. kulturuli proeqtebi ganviTarebisaTvis ------------------------------ 147 meri qei judi. qarTuli kulturuli memkvidreoba rogorc ekonomikuri resursi ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 148 mauren doili, jefri doili. kulturuli turizmi da "Ria muzeumi" --------------------- 149 dimitri jafariZe. kulturuli turizmis perspeqtivebi saqarTveloSi ----------------- 150 ia Tabagari. kulturuli turizmi - urTierTobebi eklesiasa da turizmis industrias Soris ----------------------------------------------------------------- 150 milan prodanoviCi. kulturaTa dialogi da civilizaciaTa konfliqti saganmanaTleblo/ kulturul turizmTan da regionaluri kulturis evropul memkvidreobasTan integraciis sakiTxebTan mimarTebaSi ----------------------------------- 150

6

Preface Nikoloz Vacheishvili. Minister of Culture, Monuments Protection and Sports of Georgia ------------------- 12 Maka Dvalishvili. Project Leader, Georgian Arts and Culture Center ------------------------------------------ 13 Symposium Bodies ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16 Acknowledgments ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 17 Foreword Dimiti Tumanishvili. G. Chubunashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection, Tbilisi State Academy of Art --------------------------------------------20 Teimuraz Sakvarelidze. G. Chubunashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21

CONTENTS

I. Section Ancient Georgia AG Nino Jakeli. Ancient Jewelry and Other Works of Art from the Upper Paleolithic Site of Dzudzuana Cave (Western Georgian) -----------------------------------------------------------38 Nino Shanshashvili, Giorgi Narimanishvili. Cultural Interaction of Mesopotamia with the South Caucasus in the Early Bronze Age ------------------------------------------------------------------- 39 Zurab Makharadze. The Works of Art from Multilayered Site at Tsikhiagora --------------------------------- 39 Karen S. Rubinson. A Re-evaluation of Kuftin's Analysis of the Trialeti Silver Goblet and Bucket in Light of Modern Theory and Current Archaeological Knowledge ------------------------------------ 40 Anna Kldiashvili. Image Semantics and the Model of the Universe in Pre-Christian Georgian Culture ----------- 40 Mikheil Abramishvili. From Çatalhöyük to Svetitskhoveli - Extracts from the Enduring Cult of the Bull ------------ 41 Goderdzi Narimanashvili, Kakha Khimshiashvili. Bronze Age Settlements in Trialeti ---------------------41 Ketevan Ramishvili. Horse Figurines in Old Georgia and Names Relating to Horse-Breeding in the Georgian Language ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 42 Nino Gomelauri. Georgia and Eurasia in the 2nd-1st Millennia BC according to Minor Bronze Plastics -------------- 43 Manana Tsereteli. Colchian Ritual Axe / Semantics and Artistic Style ------------------------------------------ 43 Ori Soltes. Defining Georgianness in Antiquity --------------------------------------------------------------------- 44 Tamaz Sanikidze. About the Main Stages in the History of the Rock-Carved Town of Uplistsikhe ------------ 44 Mariam Gvelesiani. For the Interpretation of an Anthropomorphic Figure from Katlanikhevi ------------- 45 Vakhtang Shatberashvili. Two Painted Glass Jugs from the Village Khovle ---------------------------------- 46 Teimuraz Bibiluri. Temple of Apollo in Greater Mtskheta -------------------------------------------------------- 47 Amiran Kakhidze, Michael Vickers. Trade, Economic and Cultural Connections between Athens and Colchis in the Classical Period (According to the Material Obtained by the Joint Georgian-British Expedition to Pitchvnari) --------------------------------------------------------------- 47 Nino Dzneladze. Greek Painted Pottery from Pitchvnari ---------------------------------------------------------- 48 Tamar Shalikadze, Emzar Ebralidze. Commercial and Cultural Ties between Gonio-Apsaros and the Western Mediterranean --------------------------------------------------------------------- 48 Merab Khalvashi. Imported Amphorae at Pitchvnari ------------------------------------------------------------- 49 Irine Varshalomidze. Roman Coins from Gonio-Apsaros --------------------------------------------------------- 49 Shota Mamuladze, Emzar Kakhidze. Apsaros ­ The Roman Cultural Centre at the Eastern Black Sea Coast ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 50 II. Medieval Georgia MG Christopher Haas. Ioane Zedazneli: A Georgian Saint in the Syrian Ascetical Tradition -------------------- 75 Alexei M. Lidov. Eastern Christian `Image-Paradigms': A Hierotopic Dimension of Medieval Art History ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 75 Ekaterine Gedevanishvili, Marine Kenia. The Correlation of the Word and Image in the Medieval Georgian Mural Painting ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 76 Ori Soltes. The Art of "The Knight" in its Contexts ---------------------------------------------------------------- 76 7

Mariam Didebulidze. Secular Tendencies in the Culture of Queen Tamar's Epoch and its Contemporaneous Mural Painting ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 77 Pavlos Flourentzos. The Byzantine Mosaics and Wall Painting of Churches in Cyprus ---------------------- 77 Aleksandra Davidov Temerinski. Eschatology, Ideology, Contextualisation: The Last Judgment in Decani, Akhtala and Timotesubani --------------------------------------------------------- 78 Ida Sinkevic. Fresco Icons in Monumental Art of Georgia and Byzantium: Meaning and Significance ---------------- 78 Irine Mamaiashvili. Post Byzantine Tendencies in 16th c. Georgian Mural Painting -------------------------- 79 Beatrice Tolidjian. Georgian Inspiration for External Wall Decoration of Gregorios Pakourianos Foundations Around Plovdiv, Bulgaria --------------------------------------------------------------- 79 Tamar Khundadze. The Images of Historical Figures in Medieval (6th -11thc) Georgian Facade Sculpture -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 80 Ekaterine Kvachatadze. The Main Trends of the Medieval Georgian Facade Sculpture After 11th c ----------------- 81 Peter Grossmann. Roman and Late Roman Elements in the Early Christian Architecture of Egypt in Comparison with the Situation in Georgia ---------------------------------------------- 81 John Wilkinson. Where did Georgia's Churches Start? ----------------------------------------------------------- 82 Irine Giviashvili. Georgian Polyapsidal Church Architecture ---------------------------------------------------- 82 Ketevan Abashidze. Stone Facing in Georgian Ecclesiastic Architecture -------------------------------------- 83 David Khoshtaria. Architecture of Tao-Klarjeti: History and Perspectives of Study -------------------------- 83 Dr. Bruno Baumgartner. Unknown and Less Known Georgian Monuments in Northeast Turkey ---------------- 84 Markus Bogisch. Some Remarks on Georgian Art History and the Cross-in-square Core of the Church in Oshki in the Historic Province of Tao (Northeast Turkey) ------------------------------- 85 Nato Gengiuri. Porches of Georgian Churches (From Early Christian Period to Advanced Middle Ages) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 85 Irma Berdzenishvili. The Ecclesiastic Architecture of Abkhazeti in Early Middle Ages ---------------------- 86 Edith Neubauer. Georgian Medieval Architecture and Sculpture and the Central European Romanesque Period ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 87 Veronica Kalas, Yavuz Özkaya. The Georgian Aspects of Medieval Architecture at Ani in the Thirteenth Century: The Church of Tigran Honents and the Mosque of Minuchir ------------------------- 87 Rosemary Basic. Georgia and Croatia: A Case of Common Source -------------------------------------------- 88 Leila Khuskivadze. Ornament in Medieval Georgian Repousse work ------------------------------------------ 88 Maria Lidova. Creating a Liturgical Space: the Sinai Complex of Icons by Ioannes Tsohabi -------------------- 89 Nana Burchuladze. Georgian Icons at St. Catherine's Monastery on Mount Sinai (To Georgian-Byzantine interrelations) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 89 Alexsander Saminski. The Miniatures and Origin of the Berti Gospel------------------------------------------- 90 Nino Kavtaria. Artistic Aspects of the 12th-13th c Georgian Gospels Illumination ----------------------------- 91 Lali Osepashvili. The Peculiarities of the Decorative Design of the Georgian Liturgical Scrolls (XII-XIV centuries) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 91 Izolda Melikishvili. The Symbolic Meaning of Color and Form of the Ecclesiastic Vestments ------------------- 92 Poster Presentations ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 93-94 III Section Modernism in Georgia MIG Gaston Buachidze. Georgian Painting in European Context: Niko Pirosmani, Lado Gudiashvili, David Kakabadze ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 109 Gogi Khoshtaria. Binary Opposition in Niko Pirosmanashvili's Works and Modernist Art --------------------- 109 Liana Antelava. Continual Model of the Universal Space/Time in Georgian Paintings ---------------------- 110 Marina Medzmariashvili. Pirosmani's Art in the Framework of European Modernism --------------------- 110 Nana Kipiani. "Poetically Abides a Man" -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 111 Anna Shanshiashivili. The Painting of Niko Pirosmani in the Context of Late 19th ­Early 20th c. European Art --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 111 Nestan Tatarashvili. European Cultural Heritage - Art Nouveau Architecture in Georgia --------------------- 112 Maia Tsitsishvili. From Expressionism to Dada: Georgian Painting from 1910 to the 1930s (Based on Recent Discoveries) ------------------------------------------------------------------- 113 8

Irine Abesadze. From Georgian Modernism to Transavantgardism, a Definition of Terms ------------------------ 113 Tea Tabatadze. Towards the Definition of Certain Characteristics of Modernist Artistic Cafes ­ Conceptual Aspect of the Kimerioni Wall Paintings ------------------------------------------------------- 114 Mzia Chikhradze. Futurist Book, Tbilisi 1910-1920 -------------------------------------------------------------- 115 Nino Zaalishvili. Several Trends in Georgian Graphic Art of the 1920s and 1930s --------------------------- 115 Ketevan Shavgulidze. The Principle of Montage in Georgian Stage Design (1920s) ------------------------- 116 Tea Urushadze. Peculiarity of Constructivism in Georgian Stage Design -------------------------------------- 117 Poster Presentations ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 118 IV. Section Restoration/Conservation; Subsection: Biological Deterioration in Cultural Heritage Maia Shavishvili. General Overview of the Restoration field in Georgia --------------------------------------- 131 Sabina Vedovello. A Shared Project ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 131 Erik Wurger. New Methods of the Consolidation of the Basement of Historic Structures ------------------------- 132 Mark Gittins. Methodological and Practical Approaches to the Conservation of Three Georgian Wall Paintings ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 132 Nana Kuprashvili. 12th c Painting Techniques of the Main Church at Gelati Monastery ----------------------- 133 Giulia Caneva. Biodeterioration of Mural Paintings -------------------------------------------------------------- 134 Thomas Warsheid. Biodeterioration on Wall-Paintings ---------------------------------------------------------- 134 Francesco Imperi. Understanding the Etiology of Rosy Discoloration on Ancient Wall Paintings: A Molecular Approach ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 135 Nino Kitovani. The Information on the Study and Conservation Methodology of the Central Icon of the Ubisi Triptych --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 135 Darejan Gogashvili. Several Issues Relating to the Conservation of the Papyruses Kept in the National Centre of Manuscripts -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 136 Mari Claude Depassiot. Restoration or Conservation, What to Choose? -------------------------------------- 137 Nino Kalandadze. The Method for Conservation of Bronze Artifacts by theExample of Findings Unearthed in Ancient Settlement of Vani ------------------------------------------------------------------ 137 Tea Kintsurashvili. Scanning Glassware from Vani by Means of Electronic Microscope-Energy Dispersive Analysis: Its X-ray-Fluorescence study, Restoration and Conservation ---------------------------- 138 Poster Presentations --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 139 V. Section Cultural Tourism CT Knut Gerber. About Economic Effects in Cultural Tourism - More Chances Than Risks? ---------------------- 152 Betsy Haskell. Georgian Tourism ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 152 Paata Shanshiashvili. Advancement of Georgia's Tourism Competitiveness through Building of Protected Areas Network ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 153 Niko Kvaratskhelia. Tendencies and Prospects of Cultural Tourism Development in Georgia ---------------------- 154 Dorothea Papathanassiou-Zuhrt. Transinterpret II: Heritage Interpretation as a Vehicle for Multisensorial Experiences. The Case of Greece "The Project HERODOT: Tourism use of the historic environment-Know-how transfer and quality management practices at the regional level": A collaborative network to promote regional identities and cultural heritage ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 155 Mine Kadirolu. Cultural Tourism in Tao-Klarjeti ---------------------------------------------------------------- 156 Maka Dvalishvili. Cultural Projects for Development ------------------------------------------------------------- 157 Mary Kay Judy. Georgian Cultural Heritage as an Economic Resource --------------------------------------- 157 Maureen Doyle, Jeffrey Doyle. Cultural Tourism and the Open Museum ------------------------------------- 158 Dimirti Japaridze. Perspectives of Cultural Tourism in Georgia ------------------------------------------------ 159 Ia Tabagari. Cultural Tourism - Relations Between Church and Tourism Industries -------------------------- 156 Milan Prodanovic. Dialogue of Cultures and the Clash of Civilization Agenda Related to The Issues of Educational/Cultural Tourism and Related Topics of Regional Culture and Integration of European Heritage ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 159

9

misalmeba

simpoziumi - "qarTuli xelovneba evropisa da aziis kulturaTa konteqstSi", wlebis manZilze miviwyebuli mecnieruli Ziebebis erTgvari aRorZinebaa. qarTuli xelovnebis Sesaxeb arsebuli werilobiTi masala, es im mecnieruli azrovnebis nawilia, romliTac sazrdoobs msoflios samecniero sazogadoebrioba. xelovnebis tradiciuli dargebis erT simpoziumSi warmoCena saSualebas gvaZlevs Tvali gavadevnoT qarTuli xelovnebis evolucias, davafiqsiroT ama Tu im dargis individualuri saxe da amovikiTxoT TiToeuli maTganisaTvis damaxasiaTebeli niSnebi. sayovelTaod cnobilia, Tu raoden didi mniSvneloba hqonda qarTuli kulturisa da mecnierebis popularizaciisa da saerTaSoriso asparezze gamotanisaTvis g. CubinaSvilis saxelobis qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis institutis mier 1977-1989 wlebSi italiasa da saqarTveloSi Catarebul, qarTuli xelovnebisadmi miZRvnil eqvs saerTaSoriso simpoziums. maTi iniciatori da sulis Camdgmeli Cveni drois udidesi mecnieri da sazogado moRvawe, akademikosi vaxtang beriZe iyo. TiTqmis oci wlis intervalis Semdeg, kvlav dadga msgavsi simpoziumebis Catarebisa da qarTuli xelovnebis saerTaSoriso asparezze gamotanis aucilebloba. simpoziumis mizani - gaaRvivos saerTaSoriso samecniero wreebis interesi qarTuli kulturisadmi da xeli Seuwyos qarTvel da ucxoel mecnierTa TanamSromlobas - udaod dadasturda winamdebare krebulSi. masSi Tavmoyrilia Cveni xelovnebisadmi miZRvnili qarTveli da ucxoeli specialistebis samecniero namoRvawari. simpoziumi, romelic kidev erTxel farTod warmoaCens qarTul kulturasa da mis unikalurobas, mniSvnelovani RonisZiebaa qarTul saxelovnebaTmcodneo da, zogadad, samecniero sivrceSi.

nikoloz vaCeiSvili

saqarTvelos kulturis ZeglTa dacvisa da sportis ministri

10

keTili iyos Tqveni mobrZaneba saqarTveloSi qarTuli xelovnebis saerTaSoriso simpoziumze, romelic gamoCenili qarTveli mecnieris da xelovnebis istorikosis, vaxtang beriZis saxels atarebs. wlevandel simpoziums erTis mxriv, win uZRvoda 2007 wels q. niu-iorkSi kolumbiis universitetSi harimanis institutTan arsebuli qarTvelologiis centris, xelovnebis saerTaSoriso centris da Tbilisis samxatvro akademiis mier organizebuli qarTuli xelovnebis simpoziumi, xolo meores mxriv ki, gasuli saukunis 70-80-ian wlebSi giorgi CubinaSvilis saxelobis qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis institutis direqtoris - vaxtang beriZis TaosnobiT Catarebuli simpoziumebis seria, romlebmac yvela CvenTaganSi, da rac mTavaria, qarTuli xelovnebis Seswavlis istoriaSi waruSleli kvali datova. qarTuli xelovnebisadmi miZRvnili saerTaSoriso simpoziumis ganaxlebis da tradiciad gadaqcevis idea Caisaxa kolumbiis universitetis kedlebSi da 2008 wlis simpoziumi - "qarTuli xelovneba evropisa da aziis kulturaTa konteqstSi" swored am ideis realizacias warmoadgens. simpoziumis msvlelobis dros saqarTvelos, evropis, aziis da aSS-s asze meti wamyvani mkvlevari warmoadgens saxelobnebaTmcodneo moxsenebebs da sastendo prezentaciebs; amasTanave, simpoziumze saxelovnebaTmcodneo kvlevasTan erTad, warmoCenili iqneba saqarTveloSi kulturuli memkvidreobis SenarCunebis problematika da kulturuli memkvidreobis roli ekonomikuri ganviTarebisaTvis (kulturuli turizmi, kulturuli proeqtebis ganviTarebis da a.S.). programaSia gasvliTi sesiebi Zeglebze - saqarTvelos dasavleT da aRmosavleT regionebSi, rac kulturul turizmTan da konservaciasTan dakavSirebul problematikas warmoaCens. gansakuTrebiT moxaruli var aRvniSno am wlis simpoziumisadmi mkvlevarTa didi interesi. simpoziumis 5 seqciaSi warmodgenili iqneba 91 moxseneba da 24 sastendo prezentacia, rac saerTaSoriso doneze qarTuli kulturis Seswavlis mniSvnelobis zrdaze mianiSnebs. gansakuTrebul madlobas vuxdi Cvens Rrmad pativcemul kolegebs, romlebic simpoziumSi monawileobis misaRebad msoflios sxvadasxva kuTxidan Camodian. da bolos, minda visargeblo am SemTxveviT da madloba gadavuxado saorganizacio komitets da simpoziumis proeqtis jgufis yvela wevrs, saqarTvelos oficialuri struqturebis warmomadgenlebs, adgilobriv da saerTaSoriso donorebs da sponsor organizaciebs wlevandeli simpoziumis warmatebiT Casatareblad gaweuli ZalisxmevisaTvis.

maka dvaliSvili

proeqtis avtori da xelmZRvaneli xelovnebis saerTaSoriso centris prezidenti

11

PREFACE

The current symposium "Georgian Arts in the Context of European and Asian Cultures," dedicated to Georgian art and culture in general, conveys a significant strategic trend in state cultural policy. By simultaneously observing our remote past in the light of our vast relations and historical-cultural context, it gives us an opportunity to have a deeper and more objective comparison. As it is well known, six international symposiums on the issues of Georgian art, held from 1977-1989 in Italy and Georgia, organized by G. Chubinashvili Institute of Georgian Art History were of special significance for popularization of Georgian culture and science and for their promotion on an international scale. Initiator and inspirer of the events was full member of the Georgian Academy of Sciences, Prof. Dr. Vakhtang Beridze, a prominent scholar and public man of our times. After a nearly 20 years gap, the necessity to hold analogous symposiums has emerged. The present collection of papers provides a good affirmation of the goal of the current symposium: To generate the interest of an international scientific community in Georgian culture and to promote collaboration between Georgian and foreign scholars. This collection is comprised of the best works from Georgian and foreign scholars who have written on issues concerning Georgian art. The symposium, which once again has widely displayed Georgian culture and its originality, is an event of special significance in art studies and the scholarly environment of Georgia in general.

Nikoloz Vacheishvili

Minister of Culture, Monuments Protection and Sport, Georgia

12

I would like to wish you all a warm welcome to Georgia for the International Symposium of Georgian Arts, the Symposium named after noted Georgian scholar and art historian, Vakhtang Beridze. This year's Symposium is the first international scholars meeting on Georgian Art to take place in Georgia after nearly a 20 year hiatus, when Vakhtang Beridze, director of Institute of Georgian Art History named after Giorgi Chubinashvili, organized the last of six Georgian Arts symposium in 1989. The initial rebirth of these scholarly discussions on Georgian Art happened in 2007 at Columbia University of New York City with the initiation and generous support of the Georgian Studies Center at Harriman Institute of Columbia University, in collaboration with Tbilisi State Academy of Art, the Georgian Arts and Culture Center, and the Fulbright Scholar Program. Georgian and American scholars gathered on Columbia's campus to present their work to leading members of their respective fields as well as to discuss the future of Georgian cultural studies scholarship. The forthcoming symposium, "Georgian Arts in the Context of European and Asian Cultures," builds on and expands the work started in the 2007 Symposium. With more than 115 leading scholars from the Georgia, Europe, Asia, and the United States presenting their papers and posters to highlight and summarize discoveries and investigations in the field from the past 20 years, to define trends of further art historical study, and to discuss the mechanisms available to raise the level of international scholarship of Georgian Cultural Studies, the Symposium likely will define the best methods of improving international collaboration and networking opportunities between art historians specializing in the South Caucasus area. Additionally, it will pay particular attention to the ever-evolving contextualization of Georgian art in relation to its European and Asian counterparts, as well as to Georgia's contribution to past and present cultural world heritage. By taking into the consideration political and social changes in the region, the Symposium will focus on a combination of academic studies and the practice and problems of cultural heritage preservation in Georgia thereby fostering much-needed discussions on the practicality of cultural heritage for economic development via cultural tourism, cultural projects for development, etc. Onsite visits in Tbilisi, Western and Eastern Georgia will also highlight some of the important issues concerning cultural tourism and preservation. I have been especially pleased to note how many scholars expressed interest in presenting their works-- this year's Symposium will feature a total number of 5 sections, with 91 paper and 28 poster presentations--which speaks to the growing international importance of the subject of Georgian cultural studies. I would like to thank our many esteemed colleagues who have traveled from all over the world to join our meeting. As my final note, I must take this opportunity to thank all the members of the Organizational Committee and the Symposium Project Team for their creativity and hard work in assembling the program; Georgian authorities for their advisement; and local and international donor and sponsor organizations for their generous support in making this year's Symposium a success.

Maka Dvalishvili

Project Leader Georgian Arts and Culture Center President

13

simpoziumis organizatorebi

simpoziumi organizebulia saqarTvelos kulturis, ZeglTa dacvis da sportis saministros da xelovnebis saerTaSoriso centris mier simpoziumis Tanaorganizatorebi: aWaris avtonomiuri respublikis ganaTlebis, turizmisa da sportis saministro, g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri, Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia, ivane javaxiSvilis saxelobis Tbilisis saxelmwifo universiteti, saqarTvelos mecnierebaTa erovnuli akademia, saqarTvelos turizmisa da kurortebis departamenti mrCevelTa sabWo: nikoloz vaCeiSvili, Tavmjdomare, saqarTvelos kulturis, ZeglTa dacvisa da sportis ministri; dimitri TumaniSvili, g. CubinaSvilis saxelobis qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri, Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia; giorgi buRaZe, Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademiis reqtori; Tamaz gamyreliZe, saqarTvelos erovnuli mecnierebaTa akademiis prezidenti; Tamar beruCaSvili, saqarTvelos saxelmwifo ministris moadgile evrointegraciis sakiTxebSi; oTar bubaSvili, saqarTvelos turizmisa da kurortebis departamentis Tavmjdomare; roin (maTe) takiZe, aWaris avtonomiuri respublikis ganaTlebis, turizmisa da sportis ministri. samecniero sabWo: dimitri TumaniSvili, Tavmjdomare; mixeil abramiSvili, seqciis uZvelesi saqarTvelo koordinatori; ana kldiaSvili, seqciis Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo koordinatori; nino RaRaniZe, seqciis modernizmi saqarTveloSi koordinatori; nana kupraSvili, seqciis restavracia/konservacia koordinatori; julia kaneva, qveseqciis biologiuri dazianebebi kulturul memkvidreobaSi koordinatori. proeqtis gundi: maka dvaliSvili, xelmZRvaneli, ana SanSiaSvili, koordinatori; gega paqsaSvili, dizaineri; eka dvaliSvili, lojistikis menejeri; TaTia Rvineria, koordinatori; Tamar kiknaZe, koordinatori; Tea gociriZe, eqspozicia; lia suxitaSvili, koordinatoris asistenti; maia anTaZe, finansebi; maka SavguliZe, komunikaciebis menejeri; malxaz gelaSvili, teqnikuri menejeri; moli TofuriZe, veb dizaini; sara bolsoni, inglisuri teqstis koordinatori. finansuri mxardaWera: aWaris avtonomiuri respublikis ganaTlebis, turizmisa da sportis saministro, Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia, ivane javaxiSvilis saxelobis Tbilisis saxelmwifo universiteti, kaxeTis mxareSi saxelmwifo rwmunebulis ­ gubernatoris administracia, merab berZeniSvilis saxelobis kulturis saerTaSoriso centri "muza", saqarTvelos istoriul ZeglTa dacvis da gadarCenis fondi, saqarTvelos kulturis, ZeglTa dacvisa da sportis saministro, saqarTvelos mecnierebaTa erovnuli akademia, saqarTvelos turizmisa da kurortebis departamenti; al. diumas saxelobis franguli kulturis centri, aSS saelCo saqarTveloSi, germaniis teqnikuri TanamSromlobis sazogadoeba (GTZ ), goeTes instituti, evraziis partniorobis fondi, evrokomisiis warmomadgenloba saqarTveloSi, italiis saelCo saqarTveloSi, kolumbiis universitetis harimanis institutTan arsebuli qarTvelologiis centri, European Foundation Stepbeyond Mobility Fund / Open Society Institute Budapest, WORLD MONUMENTS FUND® the Samuel H. Kress Foundation, Trust for Mutual Understanding. maspinZloba, sareklamo da sainformacio mxardaWera: Georgian Palace Hotel, magi stili, marko polo, mze, Mercury Classic, M jgufi, rusTavi-2, saqarTvelos sazogadoebrivi mauwyebeli

14

simpoziumi madlobas uxdis

saqarTvelos kulturis, ZeglTa dacvis da sportis saministros da piradad ministrs, baton nikoloz vaCeiSvils simpoziumis gansakuTrebuli mxardaWerisaTvis; aseve, xelovnebis saerTaSoriso centrs da mis direqtors qalbaton maka dvaliSvils am RonisZiebis TaosnobisaTvis. gansakuTrebiT gvinda aRvniSnoT g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centris, Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademiis, saqarTvelos mecnierebaTa erovnuli akademiis, ivane javaxiSvilis saxelobis Tbilisis saxelmwifo universitetis, saqarTvelos universitetis, saqarTvelos istoriul ZeglTa dacvis da gadarCenis fondis, saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumis, merab berZeniSvilis saxelobis kulturis saerTaSoriso centris "muza", aWaris avtonomiuri respublikis ganaTlebis, turizmisa da sportis saministros, saqarTvelos turizmisa da kurortebis departamentis, kaxeTis mxareSi saxelmwifo rwmunebulis ­ gubernatoris administraciis, saqarTvelos kulturis, ZeglTa dacvis da sportis saministros Rvawli. specialuri madloba al. diumas saxelobis franguli kulturis centrs, saqarTveloSi aSS saelCos, germaniis teqnikuri TanamSromlobis sazogadoebas (GTZ), goeTes instituts, evraziis partniorobis fonds, evrokomisiis warmomadgenlobas saqarTveloSi, italiis saelCos saqarTveloSi, kolumbiis universitetis harimanis institutTan arsebul qarTvelologiis centrs, European Foundation Stepbeyond Mobility Fund / Open Society Institute Budapest, WORLD MONUMENTS FUND® the Samuel H. Kress Foundation, Trust for Mutual Understanding. mxardaWerisaTvis. aseve, Rrma pativiscemiT gvinda aRvniSnoT samecniero sabWos wevrebis: dimitri TumaniSvilis, mixeil abramiSvilis, ana kldiaSvilis, nino RaRaniZis, nana kupraSvilis, julia kanevas Zalisxmeva. didi madloba magi stils, Georgian Palace Hotel-s, marko polos, mzes, Mercury Classic-s, M-jgufs, rusTavi-2-s da saqarTvelos sazogadoebriv mauwyebels simpoziumis maspiZlobis, sareklamo da sainformacio mxardaWerisaTvis. aseve, gvinda movixsenioT simpoziumis organizebisaTvis proeqtis gundis wevrebis: ana SanSiaSvilis, eka dvaliSvilis, gega paqsaSvilis, lia suxitaSvilis, maka dvaliSvilis, maka SavguliZis, malxaz gelaSvilis, maia anTaZis, moli TofuriZis, Tamar kiknaZis, TaTia Rvinerias, Tea gociriZis, sara bolsonis da aseve, yvela moxalisis mier gaweuli Zalisxmeva.

15

SIMPOSIUM BODIES

The Symposium is organized by the Ministry of Culture, Monuments Protection and Sport of Georgia and Georgian Arts and Culture Center Co-organizers: Department of Tourism and Resorts of Georgia; Georgian National Academy of Sciences; Giorgi Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection; Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University; Ministry of Education, Tourism and Sports of Achara Autonomic Republic; Tbilisi State Academy of Arts. Advisory board: Nikoloz Vacheishvili, Chairman, Minister of Culture, Monument Protection and Sport of Georgia; Dimiti Tumanishvili, G. Chubunashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection, Tbilisi State Academy of Arts; George Bugadze, Rector of Tbilisi State Academy of Arts; Otar Bubashvili, Chairman of the Department of Tourism and Resorts of Georgia; Roin Takidze, Minister of Education, Culture and Sports Achara Autonomic Republic; Tamar Beruchashvili, Deputy State Minister for Euro-Atlantic Integration; Thomas V. Gamkrelidze, President of Georgian National Academy of Sciences; Leading implementing organization: Georgian Arts & Culture Center Scientific council: Dimitry Tumanishvili, Head of the Scientific Council, Michael Abramishvili, Coordinator of Section Ancient Georgia; Anna Kldiashvili, Coordinator of Section Medieval Georgia; Nino Gaganidze, Coordinator of Section Modernism in Georgia; Nana Kuprashvili, Coordinator of Section Conservation/Restoration; Giulia Caneva, Coordinator of Section Biological Deterioration in Cultural Heritage Project team: Maka Dvalishvili, Project Leader; Anna Shanshiashvili, Project Coordinator; Eka Dvalishvili, Logistic Manager; Gega Paksashvili, Designer; Lia Sukhitashvili, Assistant Coordinator; Maka Shavgulidze, Communication Manager; Maia Antadze, Finances; Malkhaz Gelashvili, Technical Manager; Molly Topuridze, Web Designer; Tamuna Kiknadze, Project Coordinator; Tatia Gvineria, Project Coordinator; Tea Gotsiridze, Display coordinator; Sarah Bolson, Special English Coordinator; Symposium sponsors: Administration of Governor in Kakheti Region, Department of Tourism and Resorts of Georgia, Georgian Historical Monuments Defense and Survival Center; Georgian National Academy of Sciences; Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Merab Berdzenishvili International Culture Center «Muza», Ministry of Culture, Monuments Protection and Sport of Georgia, Ministry of Education, Tourism and Sports of Achara Autonomic Republic, Tbilisi State Academy of Art, Alexander Duma Center of French Culture, Delegation of the European Commission to Georgia, Eurasia Partnership Foundation, European Foundation Stepbeyond Mobility Fund / Open Society Institute Budapest, Goethe Institute, GTZ , Georgian Studies Center at Harriman Institute of Columbia University,; Italian Embassy in Georgia, Trust for Mutual Understanding, U.S. Embassy in Tbilisi, Georgia, WORLD MONUMENTS FUND® the Samuel H. Kress Foundation. Hosting and promotional sponsors: Georgian Palace Hotel, Magi Style, Marco Polo, Mercury Classic, M-Group. Informational Coverige: Georgian Public Broadcasting, Mze, Rustavi 2

16

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Organizational Committee of the International Symposium of Georgian Art owes a special debt to Ministry of Culture, Monuments Protection and Sport of Georgia and Minister Nikoloz Vacheishvili, personally, for the generous support of the Symposium and to the Georgian Arts & Culture Center and its director Maka Dvalishvili for the initiative and organization of this event. We would like to acknowledge Ministry of Culture, Monuments Protection and Sport of Georgia, Department of Tourism and Resorts of Georgia; Ministry of Education, Tourism and Sports of Achara Autonomic Republic, Administration of Governor in Kakheti Region for their support in realization of the Symposium. We have the deepest gratitude for Georgian National Academy of Sciences , G. Chubunashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection, I. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi State Academy of Arts, Georgian National Museum, The University of Georgia, Georgian Historical Monuments Defense and Survival Center; Merab Berdzenishvili International Culture Center «Muza». Our special appreciation and thanks goes to Alexander Dumas Centre of French Culture, Delegation of the European Commission to Georgia, Eurasia Partnership Foundation, European Foundation Stepbeyond Mobility Fund / Open Society Institute Budapest, Goethe Institute, GTZ, Harriman Institute at Columbia University, Georgian Studies Center, Italian Embassy in Georgia, Trust for Mutual Understanding, United States Embassy in Georgia, World Monuments Fund® Kress Program for their financial support. We have the deepest gratitude to the members of scientific council Dimitry Tumanishvili, Michael Abramishvili, Anna Kldiashvili, Nino Gaganidze, Nana Kuprashvili, Giulia Caneva for their enormous work. Special thanks to the Magi Style, Hosting Company "Mercury" Ltd, Grand Palace Hotel, Marco Polo, M-group, Georgian Public Broadcasting, Mze & Rustavi-2 for hosting, promotion and informational coverage of the Symposium. Particular gratitude to project team members whose efforts made this event possible: Ana Shanshiashvili, Eka Dvalishvili, Gega Paksashvili, Lia Sukhitashvili, Maka Dvalishvili, Maka Shavgulidze, Malkhaz Gelashvili, Maia Antadze, Molly Topuridze, Tamuna Kiknadze, Tatia Gvineria, Tea Gotsiridze, Sarah Bolson; We are also very grateful to all Symposium volunteers for their generous help.

17

winaTqma

vaxtang beriZes, vgoneb, wardgena didad ar unda sWirdebodes. usacilod erTi uTvalsaCinoesi qarTveli xelovnebis istorikosi, xelovnebaTmcodneebis, arqiteqtorebis, mxatvrebis, TviT reJisorebisa da msaxiobebis ramdenime Taobis aRmzrdeli, mravali wamowyebis Tavkaci Tu monawile, igi verc rodis waiSleba qarTuli sazogadoebrivi mexsierebidan. Cinebulad icnobdnen b-n vaxtangs Cveni qveynis gareTac: kolegebi, rogorc gamorCeul swavluls, xolo yvela, visac odesme Sexvedria ­ rogorc farTod ganaTlebul, moazrovne, xiblian pirovnebas. swored vrceli Tvalsawieri uadvilebda v. beriZes urTierTobas sul gansxvavebul, sxvadasxva ganswavlis, asakis, erovnebis adamianebTan. am Tvisebamac gansazRvra warmateba b-ni vaxtangis da qarTuli kulturis italieli megobrebis, pirvel yovlisa, profesorebis adriano alpago-novelos da nino yauxCiSvilis mcdelobisa xangamoSvebiT Catarebuliyo saerTaSoriso samecniero Sexvedrebi Cveni xelovnebis istoriis Taobaze. qarTuli xelovnebisadmi miZRvnili simpoziumebi 1974-dan 1989 wlamde rogorc cnobilia, eqvsjer Catarda. sami maTgani g. CubinaSvilis saxelobis qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis institutis da misi direqtoris, b-ni v. beriZis moTaveobiT, saqarTveloSi gaimarTa da, saerTo aRiarebiT, masStabiTa da gaqanebiT qarTvelologiur kongresebs gautolda. amitomac, araferi gasakviria, rom rodesac 2007 wels niu-iorkSi, kolumbiis universitetis, xelovnebis saerTaSoriso centris da a. quTaTelaZis sax. Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademiis erTobliv konferenciaze qarTuli xelovnebis Sesaxeb mkvlevarTa Tavyrilobebis yovelwliurad mowyobis survili gaCnda. daibada simpoziumebis aRorZinebisa da maTi vaxtang beriZis saxelTan dakavSirebis azric. momavali gviCvenebs, raoden nayofieri iqneba amjerad qarTveli da sxva qveynebis xelovnebis mkvlevarTa TanamSromloba, ra sixSiriTa da ra formiT warimarTeba igi. umTavresi, albaT, isaa, rom gadaidga pirveli nabiji SeerTebuli muSaobis gasacxoveleblad da didwilad Cvens SemarTebasa da SorsmWvretelobazea damokidebuli, iqneba Tu ara igi Sedegiani da mravlismomtani.

dimitri TumaniSvili

simpoziumis samecniero sabWos Tavmjomare g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri

18

1974 wels italiis qalaq, bergamoSi, gaimarTa qarTuli xelovnebisadmi miZRvnili saerTaSoriso simpoziumi. am samecniero Tavyrilobis iniciatorebi iyvnen Cveni italieli kolegebi ­ Sua saukuneebis evropuli da bizantiuri xelovnebis cnobili mkvlevari paolo verZone, bergamos universitetis profesori, italiaSi mcxovrebi Cveni Tanamemamule nino yauxCiSvili, arqiteqtorebi adriano alpago novelo da enco hibSi. am saintereso oTxeuls mxarSi edga, bunebrivia, vaxtang beriZe, gamoCenili qarTveli mecnieri da sazogado moRvawe, romelmac aramarto Rirseulad gaagrZela Tavisi didi maswavleblis, giorgi CubinaSvilis mier dasaxuli farTo samecnierokvleviTi programa, aramed gansakuTrebuli Rvawli dasdo qarTuli xelovnebisa da qarTuli xelovnebaTmcodneobis saerTaSoriso asparezze gatanas. bergamos simpoziums mohyva kidev xuTi aseTi saerTaSoriso simpoziumi, ori isev italiaSi, sami saqarTveloSi. samive am simpoziumis moTave da gamZRoli (saorganizacio Tu samecniero sakiTxebis mosagvareblad) vaxtang beriZe gaxldaT. mis gverdiT iyo, cxadia, imxanad ukve giorgi CubinaSvilis saxelobis qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis instituti, aqtiurad iyo CarTuli saqarTvelos mecnierebaTa akademia da humanitaruli profilis yvela instituti, saqarTvelos muzeumebi, galereebi; gvqonda didi mxardaWera da xelSewyoba respublikis xelmZRvanelobis mxridan. samive es qarTuli simpoziumi bevrad farTo da masStaburi iyo warmomadgenlobiTobiTac, Camosul stumarTa da momxsenebelTa saerTo odenobiTac, moxsenebaTa Tematikuri mravalferovnebiT da gamotanili Zeglebis qronologiuri diapazoniT. sxvadasxva qveynis cnobil xelovnebis istorikosebs SesaZlebloba miecaT uSualod adgilzeve gacnobodnen saqarTvelos kulturas, Zveli Tu axali qarTuli xelovnebis sxvadasxva dargis nimuSebs. ucxoel da qarTvel specialistTa am Sexvedrebs da daaxloebas mohyva is, rom evropis qveynebSi ­ italiaSi, safrangeTSi, germaniaSi, belgiaSi, gaCnda qarTuli xelovnebis Semswavleli centrebi; sxvadasxva qalaqebSi leqciebis wasakiTxad iwveven qarTvel mecnierebs, amave misiiT saqarTveloSic Camodian specialistebi sazRvargareTidan; gamoqveynda qarTuli xelovnebis Sesaxeb Cveni ucxoeli kolegebis werilebi, narkvevebi, katalogebi, didtaniani wignebic, albomebic. araerTi gamofena gaimarTa evropis, amerikis, ruseTis sxvadasxva muzeumebSi. xolo italiasa da saqarTveloSi gamarTuli simpoziumebi qarTuli xelovnebis da qarTuli xelovnebaTmecnierebis sayovelTao aRiarebis aSkara dadasturebad da namdvil zeimad iqca. "qarTuli xelovneba TandaTan marTlac imkvidrebs im adgils xelovnebis zogadi evoluciis suraTSi, romelic mas ekuTvnis Tavisi Zeglebis didi mxatvruli da istoriuli Rirebulebis gamo. Cven ki jer kidev Zalian bevri ram gvaqvs gasakeTebeli "Sin da gareT~. qarTuli xelovneba amouwuravia. kidev bevri Zegli gamoCndeba, bevri problema wamoiWreba, istoriis axali furclebi gaSuqdeba, zogi ukve cnobili furceli, albaT, axlebur gaSuqebas moiTxovs... ar unda Seneldes qarTuli xelovnebis propaganda aqve, CvenTan, saqarTveloSi, da ucxoeTSi. kargad dawyebuli saqme unda gagrZeldes da ganmtkicdes". - vaxtang beriZis am mowodebis imediani gamoZaxilia dRevandeli simpoziumi.

Teimuraz sayvareliZe

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri, saqarTvelo

19

FOREWORD

Vakhtang Beridze is a person who does not need to be introduced. As undoubtedly one of the most distinguished Georgian art historians; the teacher of a number of generations of art historians, architects, painters, directors, and actors; and the originator of and participant in many initiatives, he will never vanish from the memory of Georgian society. He was also famous overseas: colleagues knew him as a distinguished scholar, whereas others, who have ever met him, found him to be a widely educated intellectual and a fascinating person. His broad-mind was what supported him in his relations with people of different professional backgrounds, ages and nationalities. It was this feature that helped determine the success that Vakhtang's and his Italian friends, Adriano Alpago-Novello's and Nino Kaukhchishvili's (great appreciators of Georgian culture), had in organizing the International Scientific Meetings on Georgian Art History time after time. As it is widely recognized, the symposiums of Georgian art were held six times from 1974-1989. Three of them, initiated by the G. Chubinashvili Institute of Georgian Art History and its director V. Beridze, were held in Georgia and judging by their reception, their popularity equaled that of the Kartvelologian congress. Because of this, nobody was surprised, when during the 2007 Symposium in New York ­ a joint project of Columbia University, Georgian Arts and Culture Center and the Tbilisi State Academy of Art ­ the idea of establishing the annual meeting of scholars of Georgian art was launched. The suggestion to revive the tradition of the symposiums and dedicate them to the memory of V. Beridze followed. Only the future will show how productive the cooperation between Georgian and overseas art researchers will be, and also what will be the frequency and format of the symposiums. Yet, the most significant fact is that the first steps toward the rebirth of the collaboration have already taken place, and it is now up to our enthusiasm and long term vision to determine how successful and fruitful it becomes.

Dimitri Tumanishvili

Chairmen of Symposium Scientific Council G. Chubunashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection

20

In 1974, in Bergamo, Italy, an international symposium dedicated to Georgian art was held. The event was initiated by our foreign colleagues: Paolo Verzone, a prominent expert in the history of medieval European and Byzantine architecture and professor at Bergamo University; Nino Kaukhchishvili, our compatriot from Italy; and architects Adriano Alpago Novello and Enzo Hibsch. The above individuals received backing from Vakhtang Beridze, the prominent Georgian scholar and public person, who succeeded, not only in promoting the scientific-research program thought out Giorgi Chubinashvili, but also in significantly contributing to the promotion of Georgian art and art studies on an international scale. Five international symposiums were held after the Bergamo meeting: two of them in Italy and three in Georgia. Initiator and leader of all three symposiums (both in management and scientific issues) was Vakhtang Beridze. Significant support was granted by the Chubinashvili Institute of Georgian Art History. Actively involved were the Georgian Academy of Sciences, different institutes of the humanities, as well as museums and art galleries. Of note is the support granted by Georgian governmental officials. From the viewpoint of representation, the number of visiting and local speakers, the thematic diversity of the presented papers and the chronological range within which fell the discussed monuments, all three Georgian symposiums can be considered the large-scale events. Prominent art historians from different countries had a unique opportunity to familiarize themselves with Georgian culture and samples of ancient and modern Georgian art. These scholarly meetings resulted in a very interesting events: Centers for Georgian art studies were open in several European countries, including Italy, France, Germany and Belgium; Georgian scholars were invited to deliver lectures in different European universities; foreign scholars have visited Georgia with the same mission; our foreign colleagues have published articles, essays, catalogs, books, and albums dedicated to the Georgian art; exhibitions of the Georgian cultural heritage were held in Europe, USA, Russia, etc. Symposiums held in Italy and Georgia gained international recognition of Georgian art and the Georgian school of art studies. "Step-by-step, Georgian art gains a foothold in the timeline of the general evolution of art; the foothold, which she deserves, thanks to high artistic and historical values of its own monuments. Still more is to be done both at home and abroad. Georgian art is inexhaustible. Still more monuments will be revealed and many problems will be awaiting for us; light will be shed on unknown pages of history; some of the already conceived pages probably will be elucidated differently in correspondence with newly acquired knowledge. Popularization of Georgian art both in Georgia and abroad must not be slowed down. Good undertakings must be continued and strengthened". The recent symposium is a hopeful response to the above words by Vakhtang Beridze.

Teimuraz Sakvarelidze

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection

21

I seqcia

uZvelesi saqarTvelo

nino jayeli

saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi. saqarTvelo uZvelesi samkauli da xelovnebis sxva nimuSebi ZuZuanas mRvimis zeda paleoliTuri Zeglidan (dasavleT saqarTvelo)

daaxloebiT 40.000 wlis win kacobriobis istoriaSi daiwyo erT-erTi yvelaze saintereso da mniSvnelovani periodi zedapaleoliTi. am dros Cndeba Tanamedrove tipis adamiani da xdeba misi gansaxleba Zveli samyaros did teritoriebze. qvis industriaSi xarisxobrivi cvlilebebia, izrdeba iaraRTa tipebi da xdeba maTi standartizacia. isaxeba Zvlisa da rqis Sedgenili iaraRebi, socialuri da Sida Temuri urTierTobebi axal fazaSi gadadis. viTardeba samonadireo teqnika, pirovuli gamoxatvis saSualebebi, rogoricaa sxeulis moxatva Tu samkaulebi da rac mTavaria isaxeba xelovneba. saqarTvelo da, gansakuTrebiT, misi dasavleTi nawili mdidaria zedapaleoliTuri ZeglebiT, magram xelovnebis nimuSebis simdidriT ar gamoirCeva. amitomac sainteresoa da mniSvnelovani ZuZuanaSi xelovnebis mcire formebis aRmoCena da is rom yvela es nivTi kargad stratificirebuli da daTariRebuli fenidan momdinareobs. zedapaleoliTeli adamiani TviT-gamoxatvisa da esTeturi moTxovnilebis dasakmayofileblad iyenebda bunebriv saRebavs, oxras. amis dasturia fenebSi nanaxi oxris mravali fragmenti, romelic mRvimeSi sagangebodaa Semotanili da qvis jamis formis WurWeli, romelzedac Cans, da laboratoriuladac dadasturda, oxris dafqvis kvali. zedapaleoliTisaTvis damaxasiaTebeli Zvlis ornamentirebuli iaraRidan ZuZuanis mRvimeSi mxolod erTi, Tevzis formis bologaxvretili maxaTi aRmoCnda cxovelis simboluri gamosaxulebiT. monadire-Semgroveblebi niJarebis da cxovelis kbilebidan damzadebul samkauls iyenebdnen, romlebsac sakulto daniSnulebac hqondaT. adamiani, romelic ZiriTadad nadirobiT irCenda Tavs, mokluli cxovelis damuSavebul kbils amuletad atarebda, aseTi amuleti 10 calia nanaxi ZuZuanas mRvimeSi. paleoliTeli adamiani xvretda ara marto Zvals, cxovelis kbils, aramed qvasac. ZuZuanaSi nanaxia qvis sami samkauli, ori mZivi da erTi ovaluri formis sakidi, romelsac garSemo Semouyveba 31 naWdevi. Znelia iTqvas, naWdevi marto ornamentia, Tu mas raRac simboluri datvirTvac hqonda. saintereso nivTia Zvlis ornamentirebuli firfita, romlis "aversi" Semkulia momrgvalebuli amoRarviT, da masze dasmulia wertili, aseTi wertilebi meore mxaresacaa, magram isini gamWoli ar aris. "reversi" daxazulia urTierTgadamkveTi xazebiT, romelic oTxkuTxedebs qmnis; xazebis gadakveTis adgilebSi SedarebiT patara wertilebia dasmuli. geometriuli ornamentis gamoyenebiT Seqmnilia mxatvruli saxe. samwuxarod nivTi gatexilia. erT-erTi saintereso aRmoCenaa Zvlis ornamentirebuli sakidi, romelic SeiZleba CaiTvalos saqarTvelos teritoriaze aqamde aRmoCenil uZveles samkaulad. sakidi C fenaSia napovni, romlis absoluturi TariRia 22.000-21.000 w.w. sakidze gamoxatulia e. w. daferdebuli jvari, romelic TiTqos wreSia Casmuli da mas zevidan sworferda jvari adevs. sakidis bolo Sezneqili kuTxiTaa amoWrili. jvari samyaros oTx mxares ukavSirdeba, sayovelTaod cnobilia, rom pirvelyofil adamians advilad SeeZlo garemoSi orientacia da SesaZloa am samkaulze amoWrili jvari samyaros oTx mxares gamoxatavs, xolo mis garSemo wre ki, samyaros usasrulobas. aseve jerjerobiT unikaluria C fenaSi nanaxi "paleoliTuri venera", romelic dasavleT evropuli e. w. "klaviSiseburi" figuris analogiaa. saqarTveloSi, iseve rogorc maxlobel aRmosavleTSi, ar gvaqvs kedlis mxatvroba, aq pirvelyofili xelovneba mxolod xelovnebis mcire formebiTaa warmodgenili. kulturuli erTianoba Cans ara marto qvis industriaSi, aramed xelovnebaSic.

23

uZvelesi saqarTvelo

nino SanSaSvili, giorgi narimaniSvili

saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi - arqeologiuri kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo mesopotamiis kulturuli interaqtivoba samxreT kavkasiaSi adre brinjaos xanaSi.

samxreT kavkasiaSi Zv.w. IV-III aTaswleulebis mijnaze, mtkvar-araqsis kulturis gavrcelebis teritoriaze, Cndeba axali kulturuli elementebi, romelic Crdilo mesopotamiuri kulturuli gavleniT unda aixsnas. kulturul novaciebs miekuTvneba alizis aguriT nagebi Senobebi, sacxovrebeli Senobebis iatakis qveS micvalebulTa dakrZalva, nagebobebis kedlebis poliqromuli moxatuloba, ideogramuli damwerlobis Seqmnis mcdeloba, moxatuli keramikis gaCena, miniaturuli arqiteqturuli modelebi ­ sasakmevleebi, Tixis anTropomorfuli qandakebebi, rqiani zesadgrebi, Stampuri sabeWdavebi, sabeWdaviT dabeWdili keramika, Tixis anTropomorfuli horeliefi. kulturis zemoTmotanili elementebi mesopotamiaSi Zv.w. VII aTaswleulSi Cndeba da yofaSi Zv.w. II aTaswleulis bolomde ganagrZoben arsebobas. samxreT kavkasiaSi aRmoCenili artefaqtebi ki mesopotamiuri nimuSebis uxeS, adgilobriv minabaZs warmoadgendnen. ram ganapiroba kulturuli novaciebis SemoRweva samxreT kavkasiaSi? iyo Tu ara es procesi dakavSirebuli brinjaos xanis dasawyisTan da liTonis importTan? ra saxis kavSiri iyo samxreT kavkasiisa da mesopotamiis uZveles mosaxleobas Soris? Zv.w. IV-III aTaswleulebis mijnaze samxreT kavkasiaSi aRiniSna mTeli rigi socialuri cvlilebebi: Cndeba didi da mcire samlocveloebi; belad-qurumebi Tu "mefeebi" ikrZalebian gansxvavebul samarxebSi, maT gamorCeuli samarxeuli inventari da insigniebi gaaCniaT. namosaxlarebze Cndeba sabeWdavebi da sabeWdavebiT dabeWdili WurWeli. es faqtebi mowmobs, rom arsebobs garkveuli fena, romelic sargeblobs ufro didi privilegiebiT, vidre Cveulebrivi meTeme. arsebobs sataZro, Tu saTemo sakuTreba, romelic dacvas saWiroebs da arsebobs niSanTa sistema, romlis saSualebiTac fiqsirdeba da inaxeba garkveuli informacia. rogorc Cans, es kulturuli siaxleebi dakavSirebuli iyo savaWro gzebis farTo qselis Seqmnasa da vaWrobisa da gacvlis gaaqtiurebasTan, romelsac organizebuli xasiaTi mieca. SesaZloa, mesopotamielTa savaWro interesma gamoiwvia samxreT kavkasiaSi metalurgiis ganviTareba da brinjaos epoqis dasawyisi, romelsac Tan sdevda saerTo ekonomikuri da kulturuli aRmavloba. miuxedavad amisa, mtkvar-araqselTa patara soflebi ver gadaiqcnen qalaqebad, arsad Cans monumenturi arqiteqtura, niSan-simboloebi ver gadaiqcnen damwerlobad. Zv.w. IV-III aTaswleulebis mijnaze Sida qarTlSi formirebis stadiaSia administraciuli biurokratiuli aparati, romelic mesopotamiuri sataZro administraciuli sistemis modelis primitiul asls warmoadgens. Sida qarTlis namosaxlarebze damwvari fenebis arseboba SeiZleba am mcdelobis warumateblad damTavrebis maniSnebelia.

zurab maxaraZe

saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi - arqeologiuri kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo xelovnebis nimuSebi cixiagoris mravalfeniani Zeglidan mravalfeniani Zegli cixiagora mdebareobs Sida qarTlSi, kaspis raionSi, s. kavTisxevis Crdilo ganapiras, md. mtkvris marjvena napirze. Zeglis Seswavla sam aTeul welze metia mimdinareobs. kulturuli fenebis simZlavre 6 m aRwevs, gamovlenilia Semdegi epoqebis fenebi: adrebrinjaos xanis nasaxlari, xuTi samSeneblo done - Zv. w. III aTasw.

24

uZvelesi saqarTvelo

Suabrinjaos xanis yorRanebi, - Zv. w. II aTasw. I nax. gvianbrinjao-adrerkinis xanis nasaxlari, ori samSeneblo done - Zv. w. II aTasw. II nax.-I aTasw. I nax. aqemeniduri xanis nagebobebi, sami samSeneblo done - Zv. w. 5-4 saukuneebi. elinisturi xanis sataZro kompleqsi, rva samSeneblo done - Zv.w. 3-2 saukuneebi. cixiagoris sxvadasxva epoqis kulturul fenebSi mopovebuli artefaqtebi xSir SemTxvevaSi xelovnebis namdvil nimuSebs warmoadgenen, rogorebicaa: mcire plastikis nimuSebi, ornamentuli motivebi keramikaze, zoomorfuli ritonebi, kapiteli da sxva. am masalebis analizi saSualebas gvaZlevs Tvali gavadevnoT imas, Tu ra xerxebiT xdeboda sxvadasxva epoqaSi ideologiuri warmodgenebis gadmocema xelovnebis nimuSebSi.

karen rubinsoni

barnard koleji. aSS TrilaeTis Tasisa da sarwyulis kuftiniseuli analizis gadafaseba Tanamedrove Teoriisa da arqeologiuri codnis fonze boris a. kuftinma Tavis naSromSi "arqeologiuri gaTxrebi TrialeTSi", TrialeTis #5 yorRanSi aRmoCenil Tasze gamosaxuli figurebi marTebulad Seadara TurqeTSi qarxemiSisa da zinijerlis reliefebs. miuxedavad imisa, rom es ori fenomeni qronologiurad ar emTxveva erTmaneTs, TrialeTis kulturis kavSiri anatoliis kulturasTan udavoa. amasTan erTad, kuftinma xazi gausva msgavsebas TrialeTis Tasze mocemul or cxovelsa da TrialeTis #17 yorRanSi aRmoCenili sarwyulis sadgamze gamosaxul or cxovels Soris. mocemul naSromSi Cven detalurad aRvwerT #17 yorRanis sarwyulis yovel elements, davajgufebT maT tipebis mixedviT da ganvixilavT SemorCenili fragmentebis paralelebs. Tasze dakvirvebiT SemogTavazebT im Tanmimdevrobas, romelsac ostati Tasis Seqmnisas misdevda (im fotoebze dayrdnobiT, romelTa gadaRebis saSualebac cxra wlis win momeca). Cven gamovikvlevT rogor moxda garkveuli gamosaxulebebis "sesxeba" sarwyulidan Tasze da ra kriteriumiT moxda gamosaxulebebis SerCeva. amasTan, SevecdebiT es SemoqmedebiTi procesi arsebuli garemos konteqstSi CavsvaT, kerZod ki yuradReba gavamaxviloT imaze, Tu ratom moxda mezobeli axlo aRmosavleTidan zogierTi gamosaxulebis gavrceleba TrialeTis kulturaSi da zogierTis ki, ara. da bolos, Cven SevecdebiT kvlav SevafasoT axlandeli (da xSirad cvalebadi) daTariReba, rogorc kavkasiisa, ise axlo aRmosavleTisa, imisaTvis, raTa davinaxoT ramdenad SesaZlebelia TrialeTis kulturaSi axloaRmosavluri elementebis arsebobis axsna uZvelesi istoriis meSveobiT.

ana kldiaSvili

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri; Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia. saqarTvelo gamosaxulebaTa semantika da samyaros modeli winaqristianuli xanis qarTul kulturaSi winaqristianuli kultura saxe-xatebiT azrovnebs. am saxe-xatebis Seqmna niSansimboloebis saSualebiT xdeba. Tavad niSan-simboloebiT ki mTavari siRrmiseuli sazrisis - samyaros universaluri xatis modelireba xdeba. swored samyaros xatis rekonstruqciis mcdelobaa Cveni moxsenebis mizani da es ramdenime gamosaxulebis (iremi, wero, wre) magaliTze moxdeba. am universalur, arqetipul gamosaxulebaTa semantikis

25

uZvelesi saqarTvelo

gaazreba, maTi kompoziciuri struqturisa da aseve mxatvruli xerxebis analizi saSualebas mogvcems warmovidginoT imdroindeli adamianis msoflmxedvelobrivi aspeqtebi, gamovyoT samyaros xatis ZiriTadi maxasiaTeblebis - droisa da sivrcis gaazreba da maTi urTierTmimarTeba. moxsenebaSi qarTuli masala Sedarebuli iqneba sxva Zveli kulturebis nimuSebTan. stilisturi analizisa Tu saxelovnebaTmcodneo kvlevis sxva meTodebis safuZvelze Cven SevecdebiT warmovaCinoT, Tu riT aris am drois qarTuli kultura sxva kulturebis Tanaziari; amave dros, ra aris aTaswleulTa ganmavlobaSi masSi konstanturi da ra Taviseburebebi ganapirobebs mis TviTidenturobas.

mixeil abramiSvili

saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi, Tbilisis arqeologiuri muzeumi. saqarTvelo CaTalhuiukidan sveticxovlamde. amonaridebi xaris kultis xangrZlivi istoriidan

xaris kults adamianis rwmena-warmodgenebSi erT-erTi yvelaze xangrZlivi istoria da konservatuli xasiaTi gaaCnia. am kultma mkafio asaxva hpova xelovnebis mravalricxovan ZeglebSi, romelTa geografia moicavs vrcel teritorias - indoeTidan evropamde da kavkasiidan egviptemde. miuxedavad imisa, rom xaris gamosaxulebebs ukve qvis xanidan vxvdebiT, misi ZiriTadi simbolika, romelic nayofierebis, prokreaciuli (STamomavlobis Semqmneli) Zalis maskulinuri simbolikis matarebelia, dakavSirebulia miwaTmoqmedebis CasaxvasTan, mwarmoeblur meurneobaze gadasvlasTan - e. w. neoliTur revoluciasTan, romlis yvelaze TvalsaCino Zegli CaTalhuiukis nasaxlaria Tavisi mravalricxovani samlocveloebiT, sadac Tayvaniscemis yvelaze mTavar obieqts swored xari warmoadgenda. xaris kultma ara marto saukuneebsa da aTaswleulebs gauZlo, aramed organulad Seerwya kidec sxvadasxva religiebs. mis gamoZaxils Suasaukuneebis qarTuli qristianuli kulturis Zeglebzec vxvdebiT - iqneba es xaris Tavis gamosaxulebebi bolnisis sionis eklesiis kapitelze, sveticxovlis galavnis dasavleT karibWeze da mis aRmosavleT fasadze, Tu xaris rqebiT jvrebis Semkobis tradicia Semonaxul maRalmTian svaneTSi. xaris kultis mravalaTaswlovani istoriis miuxedavad, am kultis ZiriTadi simbolika uprecedento konservatiulobiT gamoirCeva. imis gamo, rom xari aris is cxoveli romlis Zalis gamoyenebiT ixvneba miwa, rac axali sicocxlis dabadebis sawindaria, misi simbolika ukavSirdeba sikvdil-sicocxlis mudmiv cikls, sadac xari gvevlineba rogorc mediatori amqveyniurobasa da zeciur samyaros Soris. swored am uZvelesi simbolikiT aixsneba xaris gamosaxvis tradicia saqarTveloSi, da igi sisxlxorceulia Suasaukuneebis qarTuli qristianuli tradiciisTvis.

goderZi narimaniSvili, kaxa ximSiaSvili

saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi - arqeologiuri kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo TrialeTis brinjaos xanis namosaxlarebi samxreT kavkasiis teritoriaze warmoebuli arqeologiuri gaTxrebis Sedegad gairkva, rom brinjaos xanis (Zv. w. III-I aTaswleuli) arqiteqtura sami ZiriTadi tipiTaa warmodgenili: Zeluri, Tixis da qvis. qviT nageb Zeglebs Soris gansakuTrebuli adgili "ciklopur~ arqiteqturas ukavia, romlis monumenturoba da namosaxlarTa didi masStabebi aSkarad gamoarCevs maT samxreT kavkasiis sxva Zeglebisagan.

26

uZvelesi saqarTvelo

saqarTvelos "ciklopuri~ namosaxlarebisa da simagreebis ZiriTadi damaxasiaTebeli niSania rogorc sacxovrebeli, ise dasaxlebaTa sasimagro kedlebis an calke mdgomi simagreebis didi zomis daumuSavebeli qvebiT Seneba. amgvari teqnika samxreT kavkasiaSi Zv.w. III aTaswleulidanaa gavrcelebuli, magram, Zv.w. I aTaswleulis Sua xanebis Semdeg TiTqmis aRar gvxvdeba. qva gamoiyeneba mxolod nagebobaTa kedlis safuZvlis gasamarTad, romelzec zemodan alizis aguria dawyobili. amave dros wina planze gamodis xis arqiteqtura. xe gamoiyeneba rogorc kedlis armirebisaTvis, ise peranguli wyobisaTvis. Semavseblad gamoyenebulia wvrili qva da alizis masa. amave dros iwyeba damuSavebuli qvis gamoyeneba. Sua saukuneebSi, samxreT kavkasiiis mTel rig regionebSi soflebs da msxvil dasaxlebebsac axasiaTebT mSrali wyoba, magram ar gaaCniaT mSrali wyobiT nagebi simagreebi an sasimagro sistemebi. "ciklopur~ namosaxlarebsa da simagreebs mivakuTvnebT mxolod im Zeglebs, romelTac mSrali wyobiT nagebi TavdacviTi kedlebi gaaCniaT. "ciklopur~ namosaxlarTa da simagreTa perimetri adgilmdebareobis konfiguracias emTxveoda. iSviaTi gamonaklisis garda, TavdacviT sistemebs da martiv simagreebs koSkebi ar gaaCniaT. "ciklopuri~ sasimagro sistemebis mSenebloba Zv.w. XVI s-Si iwyeba. momdevno epoqaSi maTi Seneba did masStabebs aRwevs. TrialeTis platoze gaTxrili "ciklopuri~ namosaxlarebis mixedviT SeiZleba iTqvas, rom am tipis Zeglebi Zv.w. XVI saukunidan arseboben (beSqenaSeni), Zv.w. XIIIVII saukuneSi ki gabatonebul mdgomareobas ikaveben (sabeWdavi, knole, crici, bareTi, axaldaba, loSo, somxeTis Zeglebi). samxreT saqarTveloSi dReisaTvis cnobili "ciklopuri~ Zeglebis Seswavlis Sedegebis mixedviT (gegmareba, dasaxlebis xasiaTi) SeiZleba iTqvas, rom isini xuTi ZiriTadi tipiTaa warmodgenili. didi "ciklopuri~ dasaxlebebi rTul kompleqsebs warmoadgens. maTi ZiriTadi maxasiaTebeli niSania mZlavri galavani da citadeli, regularulad dagegmarebuli sacxovrebeli kvartlebi. isini, rogorc wesi, ramdenime gamagrebul monakveTs (sabeWdavi, Tezi, loSo), an erTiani galavnis SigniT moqceul gamagrebul monakveTebs (uwylo, bareTi, axaldaba) Seicavs da centraluri, erTiani dagegmarebis principiT aris aSenebuli. gaaCniaT Sida cixe, rac mmarTveli fenis sazogadoebis danarCeni nawilisagan gamoyofis maniSnebelia. calke mdgomi simagreebi forpostebs warmoadgenda da icavda ra erT garkveul monakveTs, imavdroulad "ciklopuri~ Zeglebis gavrcelebis teritoriaze gamaval gzebsac akontrolebdnen.

qeTevan ramiSvili

saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi - arqeologiuri kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo cxenis gamosaxulebebi Zvel saqarTveloSi da mecxeneobasTan dakavSirebuli saxelwodebebi qarTulSi mcire plastikis mravalricxovan nimuSebs Soris, gansakuTrebul yuradRebas iqcevs cxenis figurebi. miuxedavad imisa, rom maTi ricxvi irmisa da jixvis gamosaxulebebTan SedarebiT mcirea, isini Semoqmedi sazogadoebis meurneobis, samxedro saqmis, sulierebisa da socialuri yofis Sesaxeb mniSvnelovan informacias Seicaven. amasTan, cxenis figurebisa da Tanmxlebi atributebis Sesrulebis manera da mxatvrul-stiluri Taviseburebebi xelosnobis ganviTarebis doneze migviTiTebs.

27

uZvelesi saqarTvelo

cxeni saqarTvelosa da kavkasiis teritoriaze uZvelesi droidan yofila gavrcelebuli, razec dmanisis paleoliTur fenaSi da sagvarjileSi aRmoCenili Zvlovani masala miuTiTebs. arqeologiuri monacemebiT kavkasiis mosaxleobas cxeni ukve Cayenebuli hyolia Tavis samsaxurSi maikopis kulturis sawyis safexurze. Sinauri cxenis naSTebi da Zvlisgan damzadebuli saybeurebi aRmoCenilia aRmosavleT evropis tye-stepian zolSic Zv. w. III aTaswleulSi. adrebrinjaos xanis ZeglebSi mopovebuli Zvlovani masalis mixedviT irkveva, rom saqarTvelos teritoriaze mcxovreb sazogadoebas sxva Sinaur cxovelebTan erTad cxenic hyolia. maxlobel aRmosavleTSi, romelTanac qarTvelur samyaros mWidro urTierToba hqonda, cxeni da cxenebSebmuli orTvala etli Zv.w. IV aTaswleulidan iyo cnobili. samxreT kavkasiaSi mecxeneobis ganviTarebaze miuTiTebs sof.doRlaurTan aRmoCenili yorRani, sadac dadasturda cxenis ori ConCxi, brinjaos borblisebri saybeurebi, ori lagami da sxva. meomarTan erTad dakrZaluli cxeni aRmoCnda aragvis xeobis sof. abanosxevSi. Sildis samlocveloze aRmoCnda cxenis brinjaos figura, xolo werovanis samarovanze ­ Tixis cxenis mcire qandakebebi. cxenis grafikul gamosaxulebaTa nimuSebi uxvadaa warmodgenili kolxur-yobanuri kulturis samarxeul kompleqsebSi aRmoCenil nivTebzec. qarTveluri tomebiT dasaxlebul terotoriaze cxeni ganixileboda rogorc wminda cxoveli, romelic dakavSirebuli iyo nayofierebis RvTaebaTa wresTan, mzesTan da ciur samyarosTan. cxenis RvTaebriobaze miuTiTebs brinjaos sartylebze gamosaxuli solaruli niSnebi, romlebiTac cxenis gamosaxulebebia Semkuli. Tu brinjaos xanaSi Warbobda cxenis stilizebuli gamosaxulebebi, e.w. antikuri xanidan TandaTanobiT mkvidrdeba cxenis gamosaxvis realisturi manera, ris magaliTsac warmoadgens axalgoris sasafeTqleebi wyvili cxenis gamosaxulebiT, Tumca stilizeba kvlav ganagrZobs arsebobas. axali welTaRricxvis dasawyisSi tradiciul "wminda cxovelTa" Soris naTlad gamoikveTa RvTaebrivi cxenis upiratesi roli, rasac, garda tradiciulisa asazrdoebda miTraizmis farTo gavrceleba. am periodis cxenis gamosaxulebaTa nimuSebi mravladaa aRmoCenili aragvis xeobaSi, alaznis auzis mTiswineTsa da mTaSi, kldeeTSi. moxsenebaSi sagangebo yuradRebaa gamaxvilebuli swored am masalebze. naSoms Tan daerTvis cxenTan da mecxeneobasTan dakavSirebuli terminologia.

nino gomelauri

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo saqarTvelo da evrazia Zv.w. II-I aTaswleulSi brinjaos mcire plastikis mixedviT saqarTvelo, ganlagebuli evropasa da azias Soris, uZvelesi droidan CarTuli iyo Zvel samyaroSi mimdinare istoriul da mxatvrul procesebSi, romelic naTlad aisaxa materialuri kulturis Zeglebze, maT Soris mxatvrul nawarmzec. gansxvavebuli mxatvruli nakadebi, romelic winaistoriul periodSi iWreboda saqarTvelosa da amierkavkasiaSi, utyuar kvals aCnevda am xanis xelovnebas. Zv.w. II-I aTasw-Si brinjaos nakeTobebiT Tvali edevneba saqarTvelos urTierTobebs anatoliasa da iranTan. am kavSirebs TvalnaTlivs xdis brinjaos skulpturebis ori jgufi aRmoCenili saqarTvelos teritoriaze. maTgan erTi gavrcelebulia Zv.w. II aTasw. Sua xanebSi aRmosavleT saqarTvelosa da mTels centralur amierkavkasiaSi da genetikurad ukavSirdeba adrebrinjaos xanis centraluranatoliur masalebs, meore ki, mopovebuli Tbilisis teritoriaze, romelic TariRdeba Zv.w. I aTasw. II meoTxediT,

28

uZvelesi saqarTvelo

mis Tanadroul Crdilo-dasavleT iranis mxatvrul nakeTobebs enaTesaveba. zemoaRniSnuli kavSirebi, am masalebis mixedviT, gansxvavebulia Tavisi xasiaTiT. mxatvruli tradicia, romelic safiqrebelia rom Semodis anatoliidan, misi matarebeli eTnikuri elementis Zlier talRasTan erTad, faqtobrivad anatoliuri tradiciis gagrZelebas warmoadgens. igi mkvidrad ikidebs fexs saqarTvelosa da amierkavkasiaSi da mis memkvidreobiTobas, aRmosavleT saqarTvelos teritoriaze, Tvali edevneba xangrZlivi periodis ganmavlobaSi, gvianbrinjaos xanidan dawyebuli aq qristianuli religiis damyarebamde. maSin, rodesac iranidan Semosuli mxatvruli nakadi saqarTvelosa da irans Soris arsebul kulturul kontaqtebs asaxavs. igi, winasagan gansxvavebiT, naklebmomcvelia da sustic Tavisi zegavlenis xarisxiT. Tbilisis teritoriaze aRmoCenili masalebi, ara mxolod mianiSnebs saqarTvelos iranul samyarosTan urTierTobebze, aramed igi Zv.w. I aTasw. evraziis farTo kulturul wreSic eqceva da am teritoriaze mimdinare istoriul procesebs asaxavs, kerZod, im istoriul movlenebs, romelic am periodSi nomad tomTa gaaqtiurebas ukavSirdeba.

manana wereTeli

saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi. saqarTvelo kolxuri saritualo culi (semantika da mxatvruli stili) Zv. w. II-I aTaswleulis mijnaze brinjaos metalurgia amierkavkasiaSi ganviTarebis umaRles safexurs aRwevs. Sesabamisad, aTaswleulis pirvel saukuneebSi mxatvrulad damuSavebuli liTonis nawarmis arseboba sayovelTao xasiaTs Rebulobs; Sesrulebis maRali done ki profesional-SemsruleblebiT dakompleqtebuli saxelosnoebis arsebobaze miuTiTebs. vfiqrobT, rom kavkasiaSi am mravalferovani erTobliobis yvelaze TvalsaCino saxviT gamovlenas warmoadgens zoomorfuli gamosaxulebebiT Semkuli kolxuri culi. aq mocemuli saxeebi abstraqtulia Tavisi arsiT, radgan maTi saSualebiT xdeba ara konkretuli, realuri garemos, garkveuli qmedebis asaxva, aramed swored abstraqtuli ideebis, warmodgenebis simboloebis saSualebiT daqaragmeba. amgvarad, abstraqtulia stilizaciis sawyisi elementi. aqedan gamomdinare, am mxatvruli stiliT Sesrulebuli gamosaxulebebis saxiT saqme gvaqvs ara cxovelis konkretul zoologiur saxeobasTan, aramed ganzogadebul mxatvrul saxesTan, romelic evoluciis yvela etapze moklebulia yovelgvar naturalizms, yofiT detalebs. zoomorfuli motivebi am SemTxvevaSi unda ganvixiloT, rogorc religiuri msoflmxedvelobis zogadi modeli, vizualuri gamovlenis gansxvavebuli variantebiT; funqciuri daniSnulebis (kolxuri culi, Tavsamkauli) da masalis (brinjao, vercxli, oqro) moTxovnebis Sesabamisi transformaciiT. miuxedavad imisa, rom droTa ganmavlobaSi zoomorfuli saxeebi ganicdis garkveul desakralizacias, qristianul xanamde warmoadgens qarTuli da zogadad kavkasiuri eTnosis mxatvruli aqtivobis erT-erT mniSvnelovan sferos. drois garkveuli monakveTiT (adre rkina-gvianantikuri xana) da TematikiT (zoomorfuli gamosaxuleba) gansazRvruli arqeologiuri masalis semantikuri da stiluri analizis safuZvelze miviReT Semdegi Sedegi; 1. kolxuri brinjaos kulturis damaxasiaTebeli mxavrul-stiluri niSnebis erToblioba scildeba erTi movlenis sazRvrebs da mniSvnelovanwilad ganapirobebs zogadad winaqristianuli xelovnebis xasiaTsa da Semdgom evolucias; 2. Zv.w. I aTaswleulidan dasavleT amierkavkasiaSi gamoiyofa brinjaos kulturis mniSvnelovani nawili, romlis wamyvani saxea polimorfuli arseba. igi asocirdeba qarTuli folkloris erT-erT yvelaze popularul saxesTan - faskunjTan. sawyis etapze

29

uZvelesi saqarTvelo

es gamosaxuleba warmoadgens kosmiur sambunebovan arsebas, romelic dakavSirebuli iyo sam sknelTan. saukuneebis manZilze moxda miTologiuri saxis TandaTanobiTi gamartiveba da naturalizacia; 3. adreantikur xanaSi arsebuli diademebi Zv.w. I aTaswleulis pirvel saukuneebSi Camoyalibebuli Sinaarsis saxviTi Sesatyvisis Semdgomi transformaciis Sedegia; 4. adreantikuri xanis saiuveliro nawarmis mxatvrul dekorSi polimorfuli, fantastikuri arseba Secvlilia identuri Sinaarsis gamosaxulebiT - stilizebuli xe da varduli; 5. msgavsi gamosaxulebis variantebi meordeba gvianantikuri xanis TavsamkaulSic /kldeeTi, gonio, loo/.

ori soltesi

jorjTaunis universiteti. aSS "qarTulobis" Camoyalibeba uZveles xanaSi winaqristianuli istoriis ukanaskneli ori aTasi wlisaTvis saqarTvelo imkvidrebs Tavs aziisa da evropis, sxvadasxva kulturaTa da tradiciaTa gasayarze. "qarTulis" formireba da gamokveTa mniSvnelovani da saintereso sakiTxia, erTis mxriv, iseTi umniSvnelovanesi kulturebis fonze, rogoricaa - asuruli, aqemeniduri, berZnuli da romauli, meores mxriv ki, adgilobriv konteqstSi. araerTgzis aRniSnula is sakiTxi, rogor esmiT saqarTvelo sxvebs da rogor iTavisebs da aTavsebs saqarTvelo "sxvisas" sakuTarTan. ra SeiZleba SevityoT am ormxrivi da erTmaneTTan mWidrod dakavSirebuli sakiTxis Sesaxeb qveynis gareT warmoSobili legendebidan da tradiciebidan? rogorad Camoyalibda saqarTvelo am xangrZlivi periodis ganmavlobaSi? an ras mogviTxrobs am or rTul urTierTgadaxlarTul sakiTxze sxvadasxva uZveles da umniSvnelovanes arqeologiur Zeglze aRmoCenili, stiliT gansxvavebuli, mdidruli arqeologiuri artefaqtebi? rogor gavarCioT esoden STambeWdavi xelovnebis nimuSebis fonze qarTuli araqarTulisgan, stilis, Tematikis Tu ostatis TviTmyofadobis TvalsazrisiT esoden mravalricxovani xelovnebis nimuSebis fonze? da bolos, ra amoZravebs sinTezisa da Camoyalibebis am process, romelic ori aTasi wlis ganmavlobaSi mimdinareobs da Cvens epoqaSic grZeldeba?

vaxtang SatberaSvili

saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi - arqeologiuri kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo minis ori moxatuli WurWeli sofel xovledan 2004 wels sofel xovleSi aRmoCnda miTologiuri scenebiT Semkuli, TeTri minis ori mooqrovebuli WurWeli. orives yelze datanilia wiTel zolebs Soris moqceuli, oqroTi Sesrulebuli berZnuli warwera "H XAPIC". pirveli WurWlis (e.w. dionises sura) tani mowiTalo-moyavisfro saRebaviT datanili TaRebis meSveobiT xuT tol vertikalur nawilad iyofa. figura, romelic gamosaxulia pirvel (pl.I-1e) TaRSi axalgazrda, uwveruli dionise unda iyos. meore da mesame (pl.I-1d, pl.II-1) TaRSi mocemuli figurebis identificireba ver xerxdeba. meoTxe TaRSi (pl.I-1b) gamosaxulia pani, xolo mexuTe TaRSi (pl.I-1f) warmodgenilia SeSlili likurgosi. meore WurWeli (belerofontes sura) or scenad iyofa. pirvel scenaze mocemulia pegasze amxedrebuli belerofontes brZola qimerasTan. meore scenaze warmogvidgenilia

30

uZvelesi saqarTvelo

mamakacis muxlebze mjdomi qali. mamakaci savaraudod belerofonte, qali ki mefis asuli filonoe unda iyvnen. WurWlis pirdapiri paraleli inaxeba korningis minis muzeumSi. misi forma da mxatvrobis teqnika analogiuria xovleSi aRmoCenili WurWlisa, aseTive warweraa WurWlis yelze. TeTri minis msgavsi teqnikiT moxatuli fragmenti aRmoCnda dura evroposis da tanaisis gaTxrebisas. arsebobs varaudi, rom yvela es WurWeli qr.S. II saukunis bolos an III saukunis dasawyisSi, antioqiis erT-erT saxelosnoSi unda iyos damzadebuli da SesaZloa erTi ostatis naxelavic iyos.

Tamaz sanikiZe

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo kldis qalaq ufliscixis istoriis ZiriTadi etapebis Sesaxeb ufliscxis kldeze adamianis saqmianobis kvali Zv.w. I aTaswleulis dasawyisidan Cans. Semdeg aq, kldis sakraluri Rirsebis gamo, yalibdeba sataZro (Teokratiuli) Temi, romelic TandaTan Sida qarTlis hegemoni xdeba (mcxeTamde qarTlis dedaqalaqad ufliscixe ivaraudeba). es xangrZlivi procesi Zv.w. IV-III saukuneebis mijnaze sataZro qalaqis gamokveTa-aRmSeneblobiT gvirgvindeba. misi imdroindeli zogadi saxe da ZiriTadi obieqtebi, Zeglis gaTxra-gawmendis Semdeg, dResac naTlad ikiTxeba. qalaqi dayofili iyo sam ubnad. misi urbanul-funqciuri struqtura zustad Seesatyviseba strabonis cnobas, romlis mixedviTac samxreT kavkasiis erT-erTi sataZro sazogadoeba Sedgeboda qurumebis, Teoforitebis (kultis Tavisufali msaxurni) da hierodulebisagan (taZris monebi). qalaqs dasavleTidan icavda frialo klde, aRmosavleTidan da CrdiloeTidan uvlida mZlavri galavani, hqonda oTxi karibWe, mtkvarze Camavali gvirabi da saTavdacvo Txrili, ganieri platformiT. antikuri periodis ufliscixis qvabul-nagebobaTa Soris mkafiod gamoiyofa sami tipologiuri jgufi: 1. kamarovani portikis mqone taZrebi. maTi ZiriTadi sivrcobrivmoculobiTi elementebia naxevarwriuli kamariT dagvirgvinebuli Ria portiki, mis ukan daxuruli oTaxi (oTaxebi), wina TavRia ezo-darbazi. aris martivi da rTuli variantebi. 2. darbazuli taZrebi. ZiriTadi elementebia ­ brtyelWeriani darbazi da mis win TavRia ezo-darbazi. 3. mrgvali, gumbaTovani salocavebi. taZrebi kldeSi gamokveTilia miwiszeda (qvis, xis) arqiteqturisaTvis damaxasiaTebeli wesebiT. xSirad aris gamoyenebuli svetebi, pilastrebi, bazebi, kapitelebi, TaRebi, kamarebi, koWebi, kesonebi, anu samSeneblo xelovnebis mTeli repertuari. qalaqs dafuZnebidan eqvsi-Svidi aswleulis manZilze intensiuri cxovreba ar Seuwyvetia, rac kargad dasturdeba werilobiTi wyaroebiT da uxvi arqeologiuri masalebiT. qveyanaSi qristianobis damkvidrebisTanave ufliscixis roli da mniSvneloba mkveTrad daqveiTda. VI saukunidan igi kvlav iwyebs aRorZinebas. qalaqis mTavar moedanze gaCnda, nawilobriv kldeSi gamokveTili, mozrdili samnaviani bazilika. sacxovreblebad gadakeTda uwindeli taZrebi (zogi or sarTuladac). IX-X ss. ufliscixe qarTvelTaTvis umTavres qalaqad da qveynis gaerTianebisTvis mebrZol ZalTa citadelad iqca. X saukuneSia aSenebuli ufliswulis sameklesiani bazilika, romelsac qalaqis centri uWiravs.

31

uZvelesi saqarTvelo

ufliscixis aRzevebis es kidev erTi, didi periodi dasrulda XIII saukunis 30-ian wlebSi. "da iyo qalaqad Cingisamde~ - ambobs vaxuSti. ama mohyva misi dacema-dakninebis Seuqcevadi procesi. gvian Sua saukuneebSi igi erTxans mcxeTis sveticxovlis kuTvnil monasters warmoadgenda, xolo Semdeg mefe-feodalTa xelidan xelSi gadadioda. XIX saukunis dasawyisidan sabolood daicala da gaukacrielda. Zeglis sistematuri arqeologiuri Seswavla daiwyo 1957 wlidan da kvlavac grZeldeba.

mariam gvelesiani

saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi. saqarTvelo yaTlanixevis anTropomorfuli figuris interpretaciisaTvis bunebis didi deda anu mdedruli universalurobis matarebeli qalRvTaeba saqarTveloSi "didi deda nanas" saxeliT Tayvanicemoda. Sumerul qalRvTaeba "innana"dan warmoebuli "nana" da misi transliteraciuli formebi (nano, ana, nena, neno, nino, nina, nane), rogorc sparsul, somxur, TaTrul, tajikur, Turqulenovan, aseve qarTul dasavlur dialeqtebSi "dedis" mniSvnelobis mqonea. am kultis Tayvaniscemas jer kidev eneoliTis xanidanve (Zv.w. V aTaswleuli) mowmobs xramis didi goraze gamovlenili, bunebis mfarveli Zalis - didi dedis gamosaxulebad miCneuli qalis anTropomorfuli e.w. "naturalisturi" figurebi, romlebic paralels hpovebs swored mesopotamiis, iranis, mcire aziisa da somxeTis imave epoqis analogiur ZeglebTan. samecniero mimoqcevaSi damkvidrebuli koncefciiT, qarTvelTa uZveles RvTaebaTa triadidan (mamrige RmerTi ­ mTvare, mze-qali anu qal-babari, kviria) ierarqiulad meore RvTaebis, mze-qalis ipostasia didi deda nana, ris gamoc es ukanaskneli, tradiciulad, mzesTan dakavSirebul qalRvTaebad moiazreba. Sesabamisad, misi kultis Tayvaniscemas, arqeologiur masalaSi solaruli atributikis mqone nivTebis (wriuli formis mqone samlocvelo kerebi, kviristavebi, urmis borblebi, diskoseburi sagnebi da sxv) arsebobas ukavSireben. nanas kultisa da mzis qalRvTaebis igiveobis Teoria Tavis droze mxolod erTdargovani, kerZod ­ eTnografiuli monacemebis analizis safuZvelze SemuSavda da Tan imgvarad, rom didi deda nanas genezisis, ganviTarebis, transformaciisa da sinkretizaciis mTliani sistemuri xazis zogadkulturul, sxva civilizaciaTa konteqstSi warmoCena ar gamxdara Seswavlis sagani. amgvarma midgomam, Sesabamisad, sul sxva suraTi mogvca, vidre es gvaqvs saerTaSoriso samecniero mimoqcevaSi, sadac safuZvlianadaa argumentirebuli am saxeliT cnobili qalRvTaebis ara mzesTan, aramed mTvaresTan kavSiri. is, rom nana/innana (igive iSTari) saqarTvelos maxlobel civilizaciebSi mTvaresTan asocirebuli qalRvTaebaa, mogvianebiT nana/innanas fard sparsul anahitas, elinistur epoqaSi am ukanasknelis monacvle berZnul artemidas, iseve rogorc Suaaziur qalRvTaeba nanos ikonografiaSic gamovlinda maT Tavze namgala mTvaris gamosaxvis saxiT. ufliscixis uZvelesi namosaxlaris, yaTlanixevis I nagebobaSi aRmoCenili TixaSi naZerwi horeliefi qalis Tavis gamosaxulebiT prof. d. xaxutaiSvilis azriT, warmoadgens saweso saxviTi xelovnebis Zegls, konkretulad, didi deda nanas gamosaxulebas, ramdenadac masTan erTad gamovlenil diskosebur sagnebs mkvlevari mzis kultis materialur gamovlinebad miiCnevs. qandakebis did deda nanad interpretirebisaTvis, vfiqrobT, arsebiTia iqve napovni xaris mcire zomis qandakeba, romelic am identifikaciis diametralurad sxva (mTvaris) mimarTebiT argumentirebis perspeqtivas qmnis.

32

uZvelesi saqarTvelo

Teimuraz bibiluri

didi mcxeTis arqeologiuri saxelmwifo muzeum-nakrZali. saqarTvelo apolonis taZari did mcxeTaSi didi mcxeTis dedaqalaqobis droindeli istoriis bevri sakvanZo sakiTxi dRemde araa gamorkveuli. rac ar unda paradoqsulad JRerdes, maT Sorisaa didi mcxeTis im ubnis istoria, sadac aRmarTulia sveticxovlis kaTedrali. qarTuli matianeebis ("moqcevai qarTlisa", "ninos cxovreba", leonti mrovelis"cxovrebai qarTvelTa mefeTa") mixedviT, ax.w. IVs. 20-30 wlebamde mainc, aRniSnul teritoriaze gaSenebuli iyo samefo baRi - "samoTxe mefisai" da rom pirveli eklesiis (svetebis mainc), asagebad gamouyenebiT aqve moWrili xe - libanis naZvi Tu kviparosi. bizantieli avtorebi (rufinusi, sokrate, sozomeni) mxolod taZris agebaze saubroben. qarTul-bizantiuri wyaroebis monacemebSi mniSvnelovani koreqtivebi SeaqvT siriul-koptur xelnawerebs. maTi monacemebis SejerebiT irkveva, rom "mefis samoTxeSi" qristianuli taZris agebamde mdgara marmarilos svetebiani apolonis samisno (koptur svinaqsarSi funqcia ar Cans) da swored "am svetebis amoReba da maTi eklesiis kankelSi Cadgma (xazi Cemia - T.b.) undodaT, magram verafriT dauZravT adgilidan" (borjis papirusis sinoduri teqsti); "... qalwuli tiriliT Sevedrebia ieso qristes, ris Semdegac svetebma eklesiaSi gadmoinacvles" (kopturi svinaqsari). werilobiTi wyaroebis am cnobas sabuTianobas matebs sveticxovlis sakurTxevelSi aRmoCenili ax. w. II s. korinTuli tipis kapitelebi. gavixsenoT - marmarilos svetebi kankelSi Casadgmelad undodaT. "mefis samoTxeSi" apolonis samisnos arsebobas adasturebs aqve gaTxrili qvasamarxi Zalze saintereso inventariT: maT Soris, saweri mowyobiloba, romlis vercxlis budeze sam frizad datanili iyo cxra muzis reliefuri, mooqrovili gamosaxuleba (apoloni - muzageti). damatebiT argumentebs warmoadgens xazgasmiT Teoforuli saxelis "xvara" (mze) matarebeli qveynis umaRlesi sasuliero piris gankurneba wminda ninos mier swored "samoTxeSi" da ara sxvebis, maT Soris dedoflis, msgavsad mayvlovanSi; "samoTxis" mcveli qalis saxelis anistos berZnuli onomastikonidan warmomavloba da a.S. yvela monacemis urTierTSejerebisa da saTanado paralelebis moSveliebiT, SeiZleba gamoiTqvas sakmaod safuZvliani mosazreba imis Taobaze, rom: a) qarTlis samefos oficialur saxelmwifo religias warmoadgenda mzis Tayvaniscema; b) sveticxovlis sakaTedro taZrisa da barbareTis eklesiis uSualo siaxloves funqcionirebda naxsenebi religiis sataZro centrebi.

amiran kaxiZe

baTumis saxelmwifo universiteti. baTumis arqeologiuri muzeumi. saqarTvelo

maikl vikersi

iesus koleji, oqsfordi. didi britaneTi aTenisa da kolxeTis savaWro-ekonomikuri da kulturuli urTierTobani klasikur xanaSi (saqarTvelo-britaneTis fiWvnaris erToblivi arqeologiuri eqspediciis masalebis mixedviT) adreklasikuri xanidan fiWvnaris uZveles dasaxlebasTan Cndeba elinuri eTnosic, romelic saberZneTis materikul centr aTonTan Cans dakavSirebuli. aqedan mokidebuli mTeli klasikuri xanis ganmavlobaSi savaWro-ekonomikur Tu kulturul urTierTobaTa sferoSi hegemonad atika gamodis. am mimarTebiT gansakuTrebiT mdidari

33

uZvelesi saqarTvelo

da mravalferovani nivTieri kulturis Zeglia mopovebuli saqarTvelo-britaneTis fiWvnaris erToblivi eqspediciis aTwlian kvleva-ZiebaTa Sedegad. es gansakuTrebiT iTqmis fiWvnaris Zv.w. V-IV saukuneebis berZnuli nekropolis mimarT, romelic jerjerobiT erTaderTia aRmosavleT pontospireTSi da, saerTodac, amierkavkasiaSi. Seswavlilia SesaniSnavad Semonaxuli 400-ze meti samarxi da aTeulobiT saritualo moedani, romlebSic mopovebulia atikuri sada Tu moxatuli brwyinvale vazebi, ioniuri da kolxuri Tixis WurWeli, saiuveliro xelovnebisa da torevtikis nimuSebi, feradi minis WurWeli, numizmatikuri Zeglebi, samkaulebi da a.S. dasturdeba, rom Zv.w. V-IV saukuneebSi kolxebsa da fiWvnarel elinebs Soris arsebobs mSvidobiani urTierToba, mWidro kontaqtebi. aqauri elinebi gamodian Suamavlis rolSi metropoliasTan, aTenTan da SavizRvispireTis sxva centrebTan savaWro-ekonomikur Tu kulturul urTierTobaTa sferoSi.

nino ZnelaZe

baTumis saxelmwifo universiteti, baTumis arqeologiuri muzeumi. saqarTvelo berZnuli moxatuli keramika fiWvnaridan fiWvnarSi aRmoCenilia moxatuli keramikis rogorc specialurad Seqmnili, ise seriuli produqciis nimuSebi. mcire zomis keramika aucilebeli iyo dakrZalvis ritualisaTvis (cnobilia saflavSi lekiTosebis Cayolebis atikuri da beotiuri wesi, rac arc fiWvnareli berZnebisaTvis da maTi meSveobiT adgilobrivi mosaxleobisaTvis iyo ucxo). Tematurad SerCeuli moxatuli keramika masze aRbeWdili miTologiuri saxeebiTa Tu scenebiT, samarxeuli inventaris mniSvnelovani nawilia. arqeologiuri eqspediciis mier 1987-2007 ww mopovebuli masala siuJetis mixedviT sam Tematur jgufad iyofa. esaa miTologiuri personaJebisa da scenebis gamosaxulebebi, maTi alegoriuli saxeebi da uSualod religiuri ritualis amsaxveli scenebi. moxatuli keramika aRmoCenilia fiWvnaris kolxur samarovanzec, rac metyvelebs imaze, rom adgilobriv mosaxleobas miuRia dakrZalvis berZnuli ritualis es formac.

Tamar SalikaZe, tariel ebraliZe

baTumis saxelmwifo universiteti, baTumis arqeologiuri muzeumi. saqarTvelo gonio-afsarosis savaWro ekonomikuri da kulturuli urTierTobani dasavleT xmelTaSuazRvispireTTan gonio-afsarosis teritoriaze aRmoCenil importul nakeTobaTa Soris mniSvnelovani adgili ukavia dasavleT xmelTaSuazRvispireTis sxvadasxva sawarmoo centrebSi damzadebul wiTellakian keramikas, Wraqebs, keramikul tara-amforebsa da minis nawarms. saqarTvelos zRvispireTSi dasavluri warmomavlobis wiTellakiani keramika pirvelad gonio-afsarosSi aRmoCnda. esenia: Tasebi, jamebi, Wraqebi da a.S., romlebic ax.w. I saukunis meore-mesame meoTxediTa da II saukunis dasawyisi periodiT TariRdeba. dasavleT evropis sawarmoo centrebTan urTierTobebis SeswavlisaTvis aseve mniSvnelovania keramikuli tara, kerZod, italikuri amforebi. Zv.w. I-ax.w. I saukuneebSi wamyvani adgili ekava keramikuli tipis damzadebasa da eqsports. afsarosisagan gansxvavebiT, aRmosavleT SavizRvispireTSi am tipis amforebi iSviaTobas warmoadgens.

34

uZvelesi saqarTvelo

dasavleT xmelTaSuazRvispireTis sawarmoo centrebSi damzadebuli Canan mozaikuri da vertikalurwiboiani minis fialebi, romlebic ax.w. I saukunis meore da mesame meoTxediT TariRdeba. rogorc Cans, dasavleTevropulma produqciam afsarosSi samxedro kontingentTa gadaadgilebebis Sedegad SemoaRwia. afsarosis funqcionirebis adreuli safexurisaTvis ar SeiZleba gamoiricxos dasavleTidan am saxis nawarmis uSualo mowodebis SesaZleblobac. es gansakuTrebiT iTqmis italikuri amforebis mimarT.

merab xalvaSi

baTumis saxelmwifo universiteti, baTumis arqeologiuri muzeumi. saqarTvelo fiWvnaris importuli amforebi fiWvnaris antikuri xanis samarovnebze da naqalaqarze mopovebuli amforebis (qiosi, Tazosi, lesbosi, mende, heraklea, sinopa da a.S.) Seswavla gvawvdis mniSvnelovan informacias regionis garesamyarosTan urTierTobis formebisa da intensiurobis dasadgenad. fiWvnarSi importuli amforebis Semotana antikuri sakolonizacio praqtikis Sedegad aq warmoqmnil berZnul samosaxlos ukavSirdeba. namosaxlarze da masTan dakavSirebul nekropolze mopovebuli masaliT SeiZleba vTqvaT, rom fiWvnarSi importuli amforebi Zv.w. V saukunis 70-60-ian wlebidan Cndeba da maTi Semotana grZeldeba Zv.w. V saukunis ukanasknel mesamedamde. drois am monakveTSi urTierToba gansxvavebuli intensivobiT viTardeboda. SedarebiT regularul xasiaTs iZens Zv.w. V saukunis pirveli meoTxedis miwurulidan. mesame meoTxedis adreuli wlebidan da meoTxe meoTxedSi gare samyarosa da kolxeTs Soris intensiuri urTierToba arsebobs. gansakuTrebulia qiosisa da Tazosis roli. Zv.w. V-IV ss berZnul da Zv.w. V saukunis kolxur samarovanze mopovebuli importuli amforebis statistikuri Sefardeba gviCvenebs, rom savaWro-ekonomikuri kontaqtebi arsebobs uSualod zemoT dasaxlebul centrebsa da fiWvnaris berZnul dasaxlebas Soris. adgilobriv mosaxleobasTan ki es nawarmi berZnul TemebTan vaWrobis gziT xvdeboda.

irine varSalomiZe

baTumis saxelmwifo universiteti, baTumis arqeologiuri muzeumi. saqarTvelo romauli monetebi gonio-afsarosidan gonio-afsarosi samxreT-aRmosavleT SavizRvispireTis erT-erTi metad mniSvnelovani Zeglia. afsarosis qalaquri cxovrebis politikuri da savaWro-ekonomikuri orientaciis kvlevisaTvis pirvelxarisxovan wyaroTmcodneobiT bazas warmoadgens numizmatikuri monapovari. 1995-2007 wlebSi gonio-afsarosis mudmivmoqmedma arqeologiurma eqspediciam gamoavlina romauli xanis 150-ze meti moneta. maTi Seswavla gonio-afsarosis samoneto mimoqcevis politikur da savaWro-ekonomikur urTierTobaTa Semdeg suraTs gvixatavs: pirvel jgufSi Sedis pirveli saukunis monetebi - 29 cali. maTgan 15 moWrilia antioqiaSi, 4 pontos samefoSi, 2 romSi, 2 lugdunumSi, TiTo-TiTo bosforSi, iudeaSi, gadaraSi da efesoSi. monetebis umravlesoba spilenZisaa. numizmatikuri masalebis mixedviT Cans, rom I saukunis meore naxevarSi afsarosi politikur-ekonomikuri urTierTobebiT dakavSirebuli Cans siriis provinciasTan.

35

uZvelesi saqarTvelo

meore jgufi warmodgenilia II saukuneSi moWrili 36 monetiT. maTgan 15 moWrilia romSi, 13 kesariaSi, 2 aRmosavleTis zarafxanaSi, 3 trapezuntSi, 1 neokesariaSi. monetebis umravlesoba vercxlisaa. mesame jgufSi gaerTianebulia 38 moneta. maTgan 23 moWrilia kesariaSi, 5 romSi, 3 trapezuntSi, 2 TesalonikeSi, erTi sinopSi. I-III saukuneebSi afsarosSi saqalaqo cxovreba dawinaurebuli Cans. numizmatikuri masalis Seswavlis Sedegad irkveva, rom am periodSi afsarosi mcire aziis gavlenis sferoa da politikur-ekonomikur urTierTobaTa mTavari ZarRvi mimarTulia kapadokiis provinciisa da Savi zRvis samxreT sanapiros qalaqebisaken.

baTumis saxelmwifo universiteti, baTumis arqeologiuri muzeumi. saqarTvelo

SoTa mamulaZe, emzar kaxiZe

afsarosi - romauli kulturis centri aRmosavleT SavizRvispireTSi

samxreT-dasavleT saqarTveloSi ori mniSvnelovani antikuri centria: fiWvnari da afsarosi. pirveli berZnuli kolonizaciis Sedegad warmoiqmna Zv.w. V s-Si. arqeologiuri masalis mixedviT naTlad ikveTeba adgilobrivi da berZnuli mosaxleobis mWidro ekonomikuri da kulturuli urTierTobebi, romelic elinistur xanaSi kidev ufro Rrmavdeba. afsarosis cixe, romelic ax.w. I s bolo meoTxedSi iqna agebuli, romaelTa samxedrostrategiul miznebs emsaxureboda da aqedan gamomdinare adgilobriv mosaxleobasTan kontaqtebi gacilebiT ufro naklebi iyo. aSkaraa kolxuri samSeneblo tradiciebis farTo gamoyeneba sxvadasxva nagebobebSi (yazarma, principia), rac adgilobrivi klimaturi pirobebis gaTvaliswinebiT moxda. Tumca, Cvens mier mravali wlis ganmavlobaSi gamovlenili arqeologiuri masalis mxolod Zalzed umniSvnelo nawili Seicavs adgilobrivi sameTuneo tradiciebis zegavlenas. bunebrivia, romauli kulturis radiacia gacilebiT ufro Rrmaa, magaliTad es kargad Cans gonios ax.w. I-II ss daTariRebuli cnobili ganZidan. Tumca, keramikul nawarmSi, igive klasikuri da elinisturi periodidan gansxvavebiT, aseTi gavlenis dafiqsireba sakmaod problematuria.

36

I SE C T I ON

A N C I E N T G EOR G IA

A N C I E N T G EORG IA

Nino Jakeli

Georgian National Museum. Georgia Ancient Jewelry and Other Works of Art from the Upper Paleolithic Site of Dzudzuana Cave (Western Georgian) The beginning of the Upper Paleolithic Age, one of the most challenging and important periods in the history of the mankind, dates from about 40,000 years ago. The period saw the emergence of modern humans and their settlement on large areas of the ancient world. Qualitative changes took place in stone industry, including the diversification and standardization of tools, introduction of bone and horn tools and the advancement of social and internal tribal relations into a new phase. Hunting technique developed and means of self-expression, such as body painting and jewelry and, most importantly, art, emerged. Georgia, in particular its western region, is rich in Upper Paleolithic artifacts but lacks evidence of artworks. Therefore the discovery of minor works of art in the cave of Dzudzuana is highly important. One should emphasize that all these items come from well-stratified and dated layers. Upper Paleolithic men used ochre-a natural paint-to serve their self-expression and aesthetic needs. This is evident by the numerous ochre fragments found in the layers of the cave, and by the discovery of a bowlshaped stone vessels with the traces of ochre verified through the laboratory analyses. Among the numerous bone tools characteristic of the Upper Paleolithic Age, only one ornamented artifact was descovered. This is the fish-shaped awl with a pierced end and, a symbolic representation of an animal. Hunter-getherers would adorn themselves with jewelry made of shells and animal teeth, both of which had a religious function. Men of the time, for whom hunting was a means of survival, used worked teeth as amulets. Ten amulets of this type have been found at Dzudzuana. Paleolithic man pierced not only bone and animal teeth but stone too. Three items of stone jewelry-two strings of beads and an oval pendant surrounded by thirty-one notches-have been discovered at Dzudzuana. Whether the notches are just ornaments or they also bear symbolism is difficult to say. Also of particular note is an ornamented plate of bone. The "averse" of this plate is embellished with rounded grooves and bears a point. Similar points, though not piercing, can be seen on the other side too. The "reverse" is drawn with intersecting lines forming rectangles. The locations where the lines intersect are marked with relatively smaller points. These geometric patterns are used to create an artistic image. Regrettably, the item survives in a broken form. Another interesting find is an ornamented stone pendant, which can be considered as one of the earliest works of jewelry discovered thus far on the territory of Georgia. The pendant was found in the C layer. It dates to 22,000-21,000 BP. The pendent shows a so-called "slanting cross", which seems to be inserted into a circle topped by a "straight cross". The end of the pendent has a concave corner. Presumably the cross is linked to the four sides of the universe. It is widely accepted that primitive man could easily orientate, and thus one can conclude that the cross carved on this item may refer to the four sides of the universe, while the circle around it must symbolize infinity. The "Paleolithic Venus," which finds an affinity with Western European's so-called "key-shaped" figurines, remains unique to the present day. Neither Georgia nor its neighboring Near East have preserved wall paintings. The primeval art surviving here is mostly represented by forms of minor art. Cultural unity is manifested not only in stone industry, but in art as well.

38

A N C I EN T G EORG IA

Nino Shanshashvili, Giorgi Narimanishvili

Archaeological Research Center of National Museum of Georgia. Georgia Cultural Interaction of Mesopotamia with the South Caucasus in the Early Bronze Age The period from the late fourth millennium BC to the beginning of the third millennium BC was marked by the spread of Kura-Araxes culture in the South Caucasus coupled with the emergence of new cultural elements influenced by the relations with the North Mesopotamia. Cultural innovations included: the use of adobe in building; burying the dead under dwelling floors; the adornment of building walls with polychrome paintings; attempting to create ideogram scripts; the development of painted pottery and miniature architectural models, such as incense burners, anthropomorphic clay figurines, horned pot stands, seals and stamped pottery; and an anthropomorphic clay hot-relief. Such cultural practices emerged in Mesopotamia in the seventh millennium BC and remained in use until the second millennium BC. The artifacts discovered in the South Caucasus were local imitations of Mesopotamian works. What instigated the penetration of cultural innovations into the South Caucasus? Was this process linked to the beginning of the Bronze Age and to the import of metal? What kind of interaction was there between the ancient communities of the South Caucasus and Mesopotamia? The period between the end of the fourth millennium BC and the beginning of the third millennium BC in the South Caucasus was marked by a series of social changes. The period saw the emergence of large and small shrines and the burial of pagan priests and "kings" in special graves with distinct burial inventory and insignia. Seals and stamped pottery also have been uncovered at ancient settlements from this period. These facts attest to the presence of a social class enjoying greater privileges than ordinary community members. Religious, or community property already existed in this culture, that needed protection. The sign system served to record and to store related information. These cultural innovations must have been linked to the expansion of trade routes and to the promotion of trade and exchange, which was becoming more organized. It is possible that the commercial interests of the Mesopotamians spurred the development of metallurgy as well as the beginning of the Bronze Age with its concurrent economic and cultural revival. Despite this, small villages of the Kura-Araxes culture failed to develop into cities/towns. There are no traces of monumental architecture, and sign-symbols failed to turn into written language. At the turn of the third millennium, an administrative bureaucratic machine, which was a primitive copy of the Mesopotamian theocratic administrative model, was in the process of forming in Shida Kartli. Evidence of burnt strata at Shida Kartli ancient settlements may well be a sign of the final failure of this attempt.

Zurab Makharadze

Archaeological Research Center of National Museum of Georgia. Georgia The Works of Art from Multilayered Site at Tsikhiagora The multilayered site of Tsikhiagora is located in shida (inner) Kartli, in the Kaspi region, north of the village of Kavtiskhevi and on the right bank of the Mtkvari River. For more than three decades, exploration of the site has been progress. The cultural layers, which were up six meters, unveil the layers of following epochs: · Early Bronze Age settlement, five building layers ­ 3rd millennium BC; · Middle Bronze Age Kurgans ­ 2nd millennium BC; · Late Bronze-Early Iron Age settlement, two building layers ­ second half of 2nd millennium - first

39

A N C I E N T G EORG IA

half of 1st millennium BC; · Structures of Achaemenid Period, three building layers ­5th-4th century BC; · Hellenistic temple complex, eight building layers ­ 3rd to 2nd century BC. The artifacts unearthed in different layers at Tsikhiagora, such as miniature plastic, ornamental motives on ceramics; zoomorphic rythons and capitals of columns often represent authentic works of art. Analysis of these items give rise to the possibility of having an overview of the artistic means which reveal the ideological conception of different periods in works of art.

Karen S. Rubinson

Barnard College. USA A Re-evaluation of Kuftin's Analysis of the Trialeti Silver Goblet and Bucket in Light of Modern Theory and Current Archaeological Knowledge Boris A. Kuftin was prescient when, in Arkheologicheskie Raskopki v Trialeti, he compared figures on the goblet from kurgan 5 of Trialeti with reliefs from Carchemish and Zinjerli in Turkey. Although we know now that they are not chronologically synchronous, nevertheless the relationship of the art of the Trialeti culture with that of Anatolia remains important. In addition, Kuftin also noted the significant relationship between at least two animal images on the goblet and two of those at the base of the bucket from Trialeti kurgan 17. In this paper I will closely describe all elements of the vessel from kurgan 17, group them by type, and discuss detailed artistic parallels for the preserved elements. In looking at the goblet, I will propose the order in which the artist worked on the goblet, based on photographs I had the opportunity to take nine years ago. I will look at how images from the bucket might have been borrowed to be applied to the goblet, and why some elements were copied but not others. I will also try to place this artistic process into the setting in which it occurred, looking at the question of why some images from the adjacent Near East resonated with the artists of the Trialeti culture and others did not. Finally, I will once more evaluate the current (and frequently shifting) chronologies of both the Caucasus and the adjacent Near East to see how the ancient history might explain the presence of the ancient Near Eastern elements clearly borrowed into the Trialeti Culture.

Anna Kldiashvili

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection; Tbilisi State Academy of Art. Georgia Image Semantics and the Model of the Universe in Pre-Christian Georgian Culture Pre-Christian culture expresses itself with image-icons. These image-icons were created via signs and symbols that were meant to shape the main idea of the universal image of the universe. The purpose of this paper is to reconstruct this image of universe using the examples of several icons (deer, stork and circle). Comprehension of the semantics of these universal archetypal images and analysis of their structural and artistic means will help to uncover their weltanschauung aspects and define the major features of the image of universe ­ time and space and their correlation. The paper will compare Georgian material to the artifacts of other ancient cultures. Employing the methods of stylistic analysis and other means of art historical research, the author will make an attempt to highlight the traits that made Georgian culture of this period "the sharer" of other cultures, explore constants throughout millenniums and the features that determine its identity.

40

A N C I E N T G EOR G IA

Mikheil Abramishvili

Georgian National Museum, Tbilisi Archaeological Museum. Georgia From Çatalhöyük to Svetitskhoveli - Extracts from the Enduring Cult of the Bull Having an enduring history, the bull cult is one of the most conservative of human beliefs. It appears on numerous works of art spanning a large area from India to Europe and from the Caucasus to Egypt. Although the first images of the bull are traced back to the Stone Age, its chief symbolic meaning, associated with fertility and a procreative power imbued with the idea of masculinity, emerged during the transition to a farming economy ­ the so-called "Neolithic Revolution". The most obvious example of bull iconography of this period comes from the ancient Çatalhöyük settlement with its numerous shrines, in which the bull was the primary object of worship. Besides having endured for millennia, the bull cult has merged harmoniously with various religions. The signs of this cult are evident at some of the medieval Georgian Christian sites, e.g. the bull heads on the capital of Bolnisi Sioni Church and on the west porch of the Svetitskhoveli circuit wall and on its eastern elevation, as well as the tradition of embellishing a cross with bull horns in highland Svaneti. Despite having a history counting several thousand years, the symbolism of this cult appears to be highly conservative. Normally used to plough the land, which is the precondition of the birth of new life, a bull symbolizes a permanent life-death cycle and acts as a mediator between earth and heaven. It is this ancient symbolism that explains the practice of bull depiction in Georgia, which is inherent to the Medieval Georgian Christian tradition.

Goderdzi Narimanashvili, Kakha Khimshiashvili

Bronze Age Settlements in Trialeti

Archaeological Research Center of National Museum of Georgia. Georgia

The findings of the archaeological digs on the territory of the South Caucasus suggest that the local architecture of the Bronze Age (from the third to the first millennium BC) was dominated by three main types of buildings: cribwork, clay and stone. Of particular note among stone buildings are "cyclopean" structures, the monumentality of which, as well as the large scale of the respective ancient settlements, make this type of architecture different from the rest of the monuments found in the South Caucasus. "Cyclopean" ancient settlements and fortifications contained dwellings, fortified walls and separately standing fortresses characterized by masonries consisting of large rocks. This building technique was prevalent in the South Caucasus region beginning from the third millennium BC to the middle of the first millennium BC, when it was almost fully abandoned. After that time, stone was only used for the foundations of walls, above which adobe brick was laid. Simultaneously, timber architecture became widespread. Wood was employed both for wall reinforcement and facing masonry. Small stone and adobe mass were used as a filler material. It was also at that time that ashlars stone began to be used in construction. In the Middle Ages, though villages and large settlements in various regions in the South Caucasus were characterized by dry masonry, no fortresses or fortified systems were built using this construction technique. Only the sites with dry masonry fortified walls can be considered as ancient "cyclopean" settlements and fortifications. The perimeter of such settlements and fortifications coincided with the outline of the site. With a few exceptions, defense systems and simple fortresses have no towers. The construction of "cyclopean" fortifications started in 16th century BC and developed further in the following epoch. The discovery of ancient "cyclopean" settlements unearthed on the Trialeti plateau can be used to date this type of monument to

41

A N C I E N T G EORG IA

the 16th century BC (Beshkenasheni). Sites in Sabechdavi, Knole, Tsritsi, Bareti, Akhaldaba, Losho, and Armenia prove that "cyclopean" settlements reached dominant position in the period from the 13th to the 7th century BC. The findings of a study on planning and settlement patterns of "cyclopean" sites discovered in Southern Georgia suggest that five main types exist. One type is large "cyclopean" settlements, which are complex systems characterized by a strong circuit wall and a citadel, and residential quarters of regular planning. Usually containing several fortified sections (as in Sabechdavi, Tezi and Losho) or fortified sections surrounded by an unbroken circuit wall (as in Utsklo, Bareti, Akhaldaba), they follow a principle of central planning. They also contain an inner fortress, which indicates the separation of the governing class from the rest of the society. Separately standing fortifications served as strongholds. Defending a specific section, they also controlled roads running through the areas within "cyclopean" monuments.

Ketevan Ramishvili

Archaeological Research Center of National Museum of Georgia. Georgia Horse Figurines in Old Georgia and Names Relating to Horse-Breeding in the Georgian Language Numerous works of minor plastics horse figurines found in Georgia are of particular interest. Despite the smaller number of such sculptures as compared to deer and Caucasian goat figurines, they provide valuable evidence on the economic, military, spiritual, and social life of the creative society. Also, the manner of execution of horse figurines and their attributes suggests high level of craftsmanship. That the horse has long been present in Georgia and across the Caucasus is attested by bone material found in the Paleolithic layers in Dmanisi and in Sagvarjile. According to archaeological records, the Caucasian population domesticated the horse at an early stage of Maikop culture. Remains of domestic horse and bone cheekpieces have also been unearthed in forest-steppe stripe of Eastern Europe dating from the third millennium BC. Bone finds from the early Bronze Age sites attest that among other domestic animals, people inhabiting the territory of Georgia also had horses. In the Near East, to which Georgian tribes had close ties, horse and horse driven chariot appears in the fourth millennium BC. A burial mound, discovered at the village of Doghlauri, provides further evidence of advanced horsebreeding practice. In it, two horse skeletons, wheel-type bronze cheekpieces, two horsebits and other items were found. In addition, a horse together with a warrior was also uncovered in the village of Abanoskhevi in the Aragvi valley; a bronze horse figurine was found at the Shilda shrine; and a horse clay minor sculptures were uncovered at the Tserovani cemetery. Furthermore, graphical representations of the horse also widely occur on objects unearthed at the Colchian-Koban culture cemeteries. On the territory populated by Georgian tribes a horse was seen as a sacred animal and was associated with the deities of fertility, the sun and the world of heaven. Solar signs, represented on bronze belts, with which horse representations are adorned, refer to the divine nature of horses. If in the Bronze Age it was stylized representations that prevailed, beginning from the Classical period, a realistic manner of horse depiction became pronounced. Examples of this style can be found on Akhalgori temple pendants that bear a representation of a pair of horses., though stylized rendering was still practiced. The role of a divine horse, leading among `sacred animals,' became especially obvious in the beginning of the new millennium. This idea, apart from traditions, was encouraged by the spreading of Mithraism. A large number of examples of horse representations from this period have been discovered in the Aragvi valley, at the foothills of the Alazani basin and in the mountains of Kldeeti. My paper makes particular emphasis on this material evidence. The work is enclosed with horse and horse-breeding related terminology.

42

A N C I E N T G EOR G IA

Nino Gomelauri

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection. Georgia Georgia and Eurasia in the 2nd-1st Millennia BC according to Minor Bronze Plastics Located between Europe and Asia, Georgia has since ancient times been engaged in a variety of historical and artistic processes, which has found reflection on its material culture, in general, and artistic works, in particular. Diverse artistic trends which crossed the borders of Georgia and Transcaucasia in pre-historic times left their mark on the art of the period. Bronze objects dating from the second to first millennium BC allow us to trace the ties Georgia had with Anatolia and Persia. Two groups of bronze sculptures discovered in the territory of Georgia provide further evidence on these relations: One group, dating from the mid-second millennium and found in eastern Georgia and the entire central Transcaucasia, is genetically akin to the central Anatolian materials dating from the early Bronze Age; the other group, unearthed in the territory of Georgia, and dating from the second quarter of the first millennium, finds an affinity with contemporary artistic output of north-west Persia. The aforementioned ties, according to these materials, have a specific character. The artistic tradition, which must have arrived from Anatolia, together with a strong wave of ethnic elements, is a certain continuation of Anatolian tradition. It found a strong foothold in the territory of Georgia and the entire Transcaucasia and its legacy in eastern Georgia can be traced from the late Bronze Age to the adoption of Christianity. The artistic trend exported from Persia, however, reflects cultural ties between Georgia and Persia and compared to Anatolian tradition, is smaller in scope and weaker in terms of its influence. The materials unearthed on the territory of Tbilisi not only point to the relations between Georgia and the Persian world but also allow us to locate them within a broader cultural context of Eurasia during the first millennium BC, reflecting the historical processes related to the increased activities of nomadic tribes in Eurasia.

Manana Tsereteli

Georgian National Museum. Georgia Colchian Ritual Axe (Semantics and Artistic Style) Bronze metallurgy reached its apex in Transcacasia at the end of the second millennium BC and the beginning of the first millennium BC, which explains the wide spread of artistic metalwork items that date to this time. The high level of craftsmanship of such pieces points to the presence of workshops that were staffed with skilled craftsman. A Colchian axe, adorned with zoomorphic figures, seems to be the most notable example of this varied unity. Referring to abstract ideas and symbolizing visions rather than depicting real, concrete environment, the images represented are nonfigurative in their essence. Thus, the major element of stylization of the period is abstractness. Therefore, the representations rendered in such style shall not be considered as images of specific zoomorphic species but rather as generalized, fictional images devoid of naturalism at any stage of evolution and of every-day details of life. Zoomorphic motifs shall in this case be viewed as a general model of a religious world outlook in which various visual manifestations are adapted to functional needs (Colchian axe and head ornaments) and differ according to the material employed (bronze, silver and gold). Despite gradual desacralization, zoomorphic imagery was extensively used by Georgian and Caucasian artists before the Christian Period. The following are the findings from a semantic and stylistic analysis of the archaeological evidence belonging to a limited period of time (from the early Iron Age to the late

43

A N C I E N T G EORG IA

Classical Period) and restricted by a specific theme (zoomorphic representations): 1. The unity of artistic and stylistic features typical of Colchian Bronze culture defines the nature of not only one artistic phenomenon, but rather the character of the entire pre-Christian art and its further evolution; 2. An important segment of Bronze culture in Western Transcaucasia in the first millennium BC is dominated by polymorphic creature images associated in Georgian folklore with one of the most popular image - a griffon. At the initial stage, this image represented a cosmic tri-hypostatic creature that related to the three worlds. Over the centuries, the mythological image became simpler and more natural; 3. The diadems dating from early Classical Period are the product of the further transformation of the expressive correlate of the content formed in the early centuries of the first millennium; 4. A polymorphic, fantastic creature characteristic of early Classicle Period jewelry is replaced by a figure of identical content ­ a stylized tree and a rosette; 5. The variants of similar representations recur on late Classical Period head ornaments (Kldeeti, Gonio and Loo).

Ori Soltes

Georgetown University. USA Defining Georgianness in Antiquity By the time history arrives into the last two thousand years or so of pre-Christian antiquity, Georgia is already establishing itself as a crossroads and meeting point for diverse cultures and traditions. The shaping of "Georgianness," both from the perspective of some of those key cultures-notably the early Assyrian, Achaemenid Persian, the Greek and the Roman-and from the perspective of Georgia herself, is an important issue. The question of how exactly Georgia is referred to and understood by others and that of how she interweaves aspects of those others with her own unique personality is continuously being implicitly addressed throughout this time. What may we infer from stories and traditions that emerge from outside and within what is becoming Georgia during that long period-and even more so, from the artifacts of diverse media exhibiting diverse stylistic elements that have emerged archaeologically from so many significant ancient sites-regarding this double, interwoven issue? How do we distinguish what is Georgian from what is not, in terms of style, subject and artist identity, across an astonishing array of artifacts? What is set in motion as a process of synthesis and definition that will continue for the two millennia that carry out of that era to our own?

Vakhtang Shatberashvili

Archaeological Research Center of National Museum of Georgia. Georgia Two Painted Glass Jugs from the Village Khovle Two vessels with gilded and cold painted decorations were found in the village Khovle in 2004. The decoration on the body divide the vessels into two registers with identical borders above, between and below. The neck of both vessels contains a gilded inscription in Greek capitals "H XAPIC", i.e. "Grace". The body of the first vessel is divided into five vertical, equal parts via the arches outlined with reddishbrown paint. The figure depicted in this (pl.I-1e) first arch must be the young, beardless Dionysus. Figures depicted in the second (pl.I-1d, pl.II-1) and third (pl.I-1c) archs are not yet identified. The figure depicted in

44

A N C I E N T G EOR G IA

the fourth arch (pl.I-1b) is Pan. The figure illustrated in the fifth arch (pl.I-1f) expresses the mad Lycurgus. The second vessel is divided in two scenes. In the first scene Belerophon is sitting on Pegasus (pl.I-c, pl.II-2) while fighting the chimera (pl.I-2b). The other scene (pl.I-2d) depicts a woman sitting on the knees of a man. The kneeling figure can be identified as Belerophon and the woman must be interpreted as princess Phylonoe.An exact parallel of the ewers is kept at the Corning Museum of Glass. Its shape and painting technology is fully analogous to the Khovle vessels and contains the same inscription on the neck. A fragment in white glass and painted with the same technology was found in Dura Europos and at Tanais excavations. It is assumed these vessels were made in the same workshop, even by the same master around the end of the second or beginning of the third century AD in Antioch-on-Orontes. Notwithstanding whether the hypothesis concerning their place of production is right or wrong, it is proved with confidence that the five vessels from Khovle, Kerch, Tanais and Dura Europos were produced at the same workshop, if not by one single master.

Tamaz Sanikidze

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection. Georgia About the Main Stages in the History of the Rock-Carved Town of Uplistsikhe The first sign of human activity on the cliff of Uplistsikhe can be traced to the beginning of the first millennium BC. It was at that time that the formation of a theocratic community, later to reach hegemony in Shida (Inner) Kartli, began (it is assumed that before Mtskheta, Uplistsikhe had been the capital of Kartli). At the end of the fourth and the beginning of the third century BC, this long process was culminated by the construction of the capital, the overall appearance and separate structures of which have been discovered after excavating and cleaning the area. The city was divided into three parts. Its urban and functional structure fully agrees with Strabo's note, which stated that one of the theocratic communities in the South Caucasus consisted of pagan priests, theophorites (free servants of the cult) and hierodules (temple slaves). On the west, the city was guarded by a steep cliff and on the east and the north by a strong wall. It had four gates, a tunnel leading down to the Mtkvari River and a defensive ditch with a broad platform. The caves made in the period of Antiquity can be classified into three distinct typological groups: i) temples with a vaulted portico, characterized by a semi-circular vault topped by an open portico with closed room(s) behind and an open yard-hall in front, of which simple and complex variants exist; ii) halltype temples characterized by a hall with a flat ceiling and an open yard-hall in its front; iii) round, domed temples. Rock-carved temples followed the rules of aboveground (stone and timber) architecture. Pillars, pilasters, bases, capitals, arches, vaults, beams, and caissons were widely used. Thus, a wide repertoire of building art was employed. During its six to seven hundred years of existence, the city lived a continuously vibrant life, which can be evidenced by written records and rich archaeological material uncovered on the site. But with the adoption of Christianity in the country, the role and significance of Uplistsikhe reduced significantly. In the sixth century, however, a new revival of the site began. A large three-nave basilica, partly carved in cliff, was constructed and former temples were converted into dwellings, some of which were double-storied. In the ninth to tenth century, Uplistsikhe became a prominent city and a citadel, which united all the

45

A N C I E N T G EORG IA

forces fighting for the unification of the country. A three-nave basilica in honor of the prince was constructed in the centre of the city in the 10th century. The 1230s saw the end of this long period of advancement in Uplistsikhe. "And it was a city until Genghis," said the 18th century historian and geographer, Prince Vakushti Bagrationi. This period was followed by an irrevocable decline. In the late Middle Ages, the city's structures became a monastery belonging to Svetitskhoveli at Mtskheta, and were later passed on from one king or feudal lord to another. Beginning in the 19th century, the city was finally deserted. Regular archaeological investigations of the site commenced in 1957 and continue to the present day.

Mariam Gvelesiani

Georgian National Museum. Georgia For the Interpretation of an Anthropomorphic Figure from Katlanikhevi The Great Mother of Nature or the female deity associated with femininity used to be worshipped as the "Great Mother Nana" in Georgia. "Nana", which derives from the Sumerian goddess "Innana", as well as its transliterated forms-Nano, Ana, Nena, Nino, Nina and Nane- means "mother" in Persian, Armenian, Tatar, Tajik, Turkish as well as west Georgian dialects. That this cult was worshipped in the Chalcolithic Age (fifth millennium BC) is evidenced by female anthropomorphic, so-called "naturalistic", figurines from Khramis Didi-Gora, which are considered to be images of the Great Mother, guardian of nature. They find parallels with contemporaneous figurines unearthed in Mesopotamia, Persia, Asia Minor, and Armenia. It has been accepted in scientific literature that the hypostasis of the Sun-woman, which ranks second in the triad of ancient Georgian deities (God ­ the moon, the Sun-Woman and Kviria) is the Great Mother Nana. Consequently, the latter is perceived as a female deity associated with the Sun. Therefore according to archaeological inventory, worship of its cult is linked to solar attributes (circular shrines, spindleweights, cart wheels, disco-shaped items, etc). The theory of sameness of the cult of Nana and the Sun deity was developed based on the findings of a mono-disciplinary study, namely the analysis of ethnographic evidence, and without the consideration of a systemic line of the genesis, development, transformation and synchronization of Mother Nana in a broader context of culture and civilizations. Such approach has therefore yielded results different from those adopted in international scholarly circles, where the correlation between this well-known female deity and the Moon, rather than the Sun, is supported by sound arguments. The supposition that Nana/Innana (the same as Ishtar) is the female deity associated with the Moon in the civilizations neighboring Georgia is backed by the iconography of Nana/Innana's Persian correlate Anahita, her Greek correlate during the Hellenic period, Artemid, and her Central Asian correlate, the deity Nano, in the form of a crescent above the heads of the figures of these divinities. Clay hot-reliefs with female heads found in the first structure of Katlanikhevi at the ancient settlement of Uplistsikhe are considered by Prof. D. Khakhutaishvili as works of ritual fine arts. The scholar makes particular note of the Great Mother Nana in his analysis of the disco-shaped items unearthed together, which he associates with the material manifestation of the solar cult. Of special note is a small ox figurine found nearby, which offers evidence suggesting an entirely different interpretation of the identification of the figurine as the Great Mother Nana (identification with the moon).

46

A N C I E N T G EOR G IA

Teimuraz Bibiluri

Mtskheta State Archaeological Museum. Georgia Temple of Apollo in Great Mtskheta Many of the key points from the history of Greater Mtskheta of the time when it was the capital remain largely unaddressed to the present day. Strangely enough, this is also true for the history of that very spot in Greater Mtskheta where the Svetitskhoveli Cathedral stands. According to Georgian chronicles (Conversion of Georgia, The Life of St Nino, and The Life of Georgian Kings by Leonti Mroveli), at least through the 320-330s, royal gardens, also referred to as the "King's Eden", stood at this location, and the first church (or at least the pillars) on this spot was built by using a local tree, namely a cedar of Lebanon or a cypress. Byzantine authors (Rufinus, Socrates, Sozomen) only refer to the building of a church, but Syrian and Coptic manuscripts substantially revise the information given in Georgian-Byzantine records. The compilation of these data suggests that Apollo's Oracle with marble columns (it is impossible to establish its function from the Coptic synaxarion) stood in front of the building of a Christian church and it was the "removal of these columns and their placement in the chancel barrier that they wanted but failed to (Synodic text from the Borji papyrus); "... the virgin pleaded to Jesus Christ and after that the columns shifted themselves into the church". The note given in these written sources is further supported by Corinthian capitals of the second century AD unearthed in the sanctuary of Svetitskhoveli. (Remember - the marble columns were to be placed in the chancel barrier.) The existence of Apollo's Oracle in the King's Eden is evidenced by the grave in stone box uncovered nearby, which contains highly interesting inventory, including a writing tool, the silver case of which was adorned with a gilt relief of nine muses (Apollo ­ Musagete) arranged in three friezes. Furthermore other arguments for its existence include the healing of the highest ecclesiastical authority in the country bearing a theophoric name, "Khvara" (the Sun), given by St Nino in "Eden" and not by blackberry bushes as was the case with others, including the Queen; the origin of the name of the female guardian of the Eden, Anistos from the Greek onomastics, etc. Comparing the existing data and taking into account respective parallels, it is reasonable to assume that i) the sun worshipping was an official religion of the Kingdom of Kartli; ii) temples worshipping the sun were located in the close vicinity to Svetitskhoveli Cathedral and Barbareti Church.

Amiran Kakhidze Michael Vickers

Batumi State University and the Archaeological Museum. Georgia Jesus College, Oxford. Great Britain

Trade, Economic and Cultural Connections between Athens and Colchis in the Classical Period (According to the Material Obtained by the Joint Georgian-British Expedition to Pitchvnari) The Hellenic ethnos, which seems to have been related to Athos ­ the centre of mainland Greece ­ first appeared at the ancient settlement of Pitchvnari in the early Classical period. Beginning from that time and throughout the Classical period, Attica enjoyed hegemony in the realm of commercial and cultural relations. Samples of especially rich and diverse material culture have been obtained by the joint GeorgianBritish expedition to Pitchvnari during its ten years of research. The most notable in this regard is a Greek

47

A N C I E N T G EORG IA

necropolis of the fifth to fourth century BC, which is incredibly unique in the eastern coast of the Pontos and moreover, in the Transcaucasia. More than four hundred finely preserved graves and dozens of ritual squares-from which plain and painted Attic vases, Ionic and Colchian ceramics, jewelry and toreutics, colour glassware and numismatic objects were unearthed-have been studied. Evidence shows that the Colchians and the Hellenic community of Pitchvnari coexisted peacefully and had close ties with each other in the fifth to fourth century BC. The Hellenes also acted as mediators in the metropolis, between such cities as Athens and other centres of the Black Sea littoral, in the sphere of commercial and cultural relations.

Nino Dzneladze

Batumi State University and the Archaeological Museum. Georgia Greek Painted Pottery from Pitchvnari Painted pottery, including custom-made and serial samples, was discovered in Pitchvnari. Minor items of pottery were essential attributes of funerary rites. (The Attic and Biotic tradition of placing lekithoi in a grave was a practice also familiar to the Pitchvnari Greek community and through them to the local population). Thematically selected painted pottery with the images of mythological characters and scenes are an important part of the burial inventory. The material uncovered in 1987-2007, can be broken into three thematic groups. These are representations of mythological characters and scenes, their allegorical images and scenes of religious rituals. Painted pottery also has been discovered in the Colchian cemetery of Pitchvnari, which suggests that the local population had also adopted this form of Greek funerary rite.

Tamar Shalikadze, Tariel Ebralidze

Batumi State University and the Archaeological Museum. Georgia Commercial and Cultural Ties between Gonio-Apsaros and the Western Mediterranean The majority of the imported objects unearthed in Gonio-Apsaros include red-varnished pottery, oil lamps and ceramic containers, such as amphorae and glass items, which had been produced in various Western Mediterranean workshops. Gonio-Apsaros is a site where red-varnished ceramic items of western origin, including various vessels and oil lamps, were discovered for the first time on the Georgian coast. The unearthed objects date from the second to third quarter of the first century AD and the early second century. Ceramic containers, such as Italic amphorae, also provide valuable information for the study of relations with various workshops of Western Europe. The production and export of ceramics prevailed in the period from the first century BC to the first century AD. Amphorae of this type are very rare in the eastern Black Sea littoral, while they are more common in Apsaros. Uncovered inlaid glass phialai, also dating from the second and third quarters of the first century AD, seem to have been produced in the western Mediterranean. It is most likely that Western European products arrived in Apsaros because of military contingent displacements. However, the possibility of direct supply of these products, and in particular of Italic amphorae, from the West to Apsaros at an early stage cannot be totally ruled out.

48

A N C I E N T G EOR G IA

Merab Khalvashi

Batumi State University and the Archaeological Museum. Georgia Imported Amphorae at Pitchvnari The study of the amphorae discovered in ancient cemeteries and cities (Kios, Thassos, Lesbos, Mende, Heraclea, Sinope, etc) has yielded substantial evidence that help to establish a type and intensity of relations that the region had with the outside world. The import of amphorae into Pitchvnari is related to the Greek settlement founded that was following the Attic colonization. The materials unearthed on the settlement site and the necropolis related to it, suggest that the import of amphorae began in Pitchvnari in the 470-460s BC and lasted until approximately 330 BC. The relations were characterised by different degrees of intensity becoming relatively regular from the first quarter of the fifth century BC. In the early years of the third quarter and in the fourth quarter Colchis was engaged in intensive relations with the outside world. Kios and Thassos played a key role in this relationship. The statistical correlation between the amphorae found in fifth to fourth century Greek cemeteries and those unearthed in the fifth century Colchian cemeteries confirms the presence of commercial ties between the aforementioned centres and the Greek colony of Pitchvnari. It appears that the works reached the local population thanks to the trade ties with Greek communities.

Irine Varshalomidze

Batumi State University and the Archaeological Museum. Georgia Roman Coins from Gonio-Apsaros Gonio-Apsaros is one of the most important sites of the southeast Black Sea littoral. Numismatic finds provide a primary source for the study of political and commercial characteristics of urban life in Apsaros. From 1995 to 2007, the archaeological expedition at Gonio-Apsaros unearthed more than 150 Roman coins. The study of these coins offers the following findings on the political and commercial connections relevant to the flow of coins to the region: The first group comprises 29 coins from the first century, 15 of which were struck in Antioch, four in the kingdom of Pontus, two in Rome, two in Lugdunum, and one each in Bosporus, Judea, Gadara and Ephesus. Most of the coins are of copper. Numismatic evidence points to the political and economic relations between Apsaros and Syria during the second half of the first century; The second group is represented by 36 coins minted in the second century, of which 15 were struck in Rome, 13 in Caesarea, two in eastern mint, three in Trebizond, and one in Neocaesarea. Most of these coins are of silver; The third group united 38 coins, of which 23 were minted in Caesarea, five in Rome, three in Trebizond, two in Thessalonica and one in Sinope. The period between the first and the third centuries saw the advance of urban life. The study of the numismatic evidence has shown that Apsaros was then under the influence of Asia Minor. It also appears that it had most intense political and economic relations with Cappadocia and the southern cities and towns of the Black Sea coast.

49

A N C I E N T G EORG IA

Shota Mamuladze, Emzar Kakhidze

Batumi State University and the Archaeological Museum. Georgia

Apsaros ­ The Roman Cultural Centre at the Eastern Black Sea Coast Southwest Georgia has two important centres of the Antiquity: Pitchvnari and Apsaros. The site of Pitchvnari emerged as a result of Greek colonization, in the fifth century BC. There is enough archaeological evidence to assume that local and Greek communities had close economic and cultural relations, which were further reinforced in the Hellenistic period. Built in the last quarter of the first century AD, the fort Apsaros served military and strategic purposes for the Romans and, therefore, was less engaged in contacts with the local population. Various structures of the fort (barracks, principia) reveal a profound influence of the Colchian building tradition, which is due to specific local climate. However, a negligible portion of the archaeological evidence we obtained also shows the influence of local pottery traditions. It is obvious that Roman culture had a much broader impact. This can be attested by a wellknown treasure of Gonio, which dates from the first to second century AD. However, it is difficult to observe Roman influence on ceramics, as opposed to objects dating from the Classical and Hellenistic periods in which the impact of those cultures is more pronounced.

50

I I seqcia

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

kristofer haasi

vilanovas universiteti. aSS ioane zedazneli: qarTveli wmindani siriul asketur tradiciaSi meeqvse saukunis pirvel naxevarSi, saqarTveloSi qristianobaze Zlieri zegavlena moaxdina axladSemotanilma monasticizmma. es ukavSirdeba iberiis dedaqalaq mcxeTaSi wm. ioane zedaznelis da misi 12 mowafis Camosvlas, romlebic qarTuli tradiciaSi aTcameti asureli mamis saxeliT arian cnobilni. wm. ioanes mowafeebi male mimoifantnen mTels iberiaSi da maTi winamZRvris mgavsad, asketur cxovrebas, saswaulmoqmedebas da saxarebis qadagebas Seudgnen. zogierTi avtoris mtkicebiT, asureli mamebi ara sirieli, aramed qarTvelebi iyvnen, romelTac siriul asketizmTan hqoniaT kavSiri. sxvani maT ganixilaven, rogorc monofizitebs, romlebic iustinesa da iustinianes mier antiqalkedonelebis devnas gamoeqcnen. aRniSnuli berebis warmoSobisa da xasiaTis kvlevisaTvis mniSvnelovania asurel mamaTa Soris erT-erTi yvelaze cnobili beris - wm. ioane zedaznelis swavlebisa da asketuri cxovrebis analizi. rogorc asurel mamaTa sulieri winamZRvari, wm. ioane zedazneli maTTvis Tavisi cxovrebis asketuri wesiT mniSvnelovan magaliTs da maTi swavlebis mniSvnelovan pirvelwyaros warmoadgenda. moxsenebis sagania wm.ioane zedaznelis cxovrebisa da qadagebis amsaxveli adreuli wyaroebi, romlebic Sedarebulia adreul siriul wyaroebTan, rac miznad isaxavs meeqvse saukunis saqarTveloSi samonastro cxovrebis wamowyebaTa da maTi savaraudo siriuli fesvebis kavSirTa gamovlenas. amasTn, moxseneba aseve ikvlevs wm. ioane zedaznelis adgils qarTuli istoriuli cnobierebis CamoyalibebaSi, da im xerxebs, romelic mas ukvdavhyofs qarTul ikonografiasa da kedlis mxatvrobaSi.

aleqsei lidovi

ruseTis saxviTi xelovnebis akademia. ruseTi aRmosavleT qristianuli "gamosaxuleba-paradigma": hierotopuli ganzomileba Sua saukuneebis xelovnebis istoriaSi moxsenebaSi ganxilulia aRmosavleTqristianuli xelovnebis istoriisadmi axali midgoma, romelic kavSirSia qarTuli kulturisa da xelovnebis Seswavlis meTodologiur aspeqtebTan. upirveles yovlisa, SevexebiT avtoris mier axlaxans SemoTavazebul da mecnierTa saerTaSoriso jgufis mier sxvadasxva publikaciebSi SemuSavebul hierotopiis (sakraluri sivrceebis Seqmna) koncefcias. am kvlevam mniSvnelovani Teoriuli sakiTxi warmoaCina. mraval SemTxvevaSi vizualuri kulturis ganxilva ar unda dadiodes mxolod nimuSis pozitivistur aRwerasa an misi Teologiuri Sinaarsis analizze. zogierTi fenomenis ganxilva SesaZlebelia mxolod gamosaxulebaideis doneze, rasac Cven "gamosaxuleba-paradigmas" vuwodebT da rac ar warmoadgens arc sailustracio suraTs da arc ideologiur koncefcias. es cneba erTgvari gamosadegi instrumentum studiorum-i unda iyos, rac fenomenis garkveuli Sreebis gagebaSi gvexmareba. gamosaxuleba-paradigma ar warmoadgens romelime konkretuli teqstis ilustracias, Tumca is erTgvari gagrZelebaa werilobiTi da simboluri Sinaarsisa da asociaciebisa. amgvari saxiTmetyveleba gansxvavdeba imisagan, rasac ikonografiuli xerxi ewodeba. imdenad, ramdenadac gamosaxuleba-paradigma

52

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

xiluli da cnobadia, is vizualur kulturas miekuTvneba, Tumca mas dadgenili forma ar hqonia, arc mxatvruli saxis da arc mentaluri struqturis TvalsazrisiT. am TvalsazrisiT gamosaxuleba-paradigma metaforas hgavs, romelic azrs kargavs misi gardaTxrobis, gameorebis an danawevrebis SemTxvevaSi. is exeba ara raime mistikur, aramed specifikur cnobierebas, romelic zogierT simbolur struqturas da uamrav konkretul mxatvrul motivsac gansazRvravs. amasTanave, is angrevs Cvens fundametur meTodologiur damokidebulebas gamosaxulebisadmi, rogorc ilustraciisadmi da sibrtyobrivi suraTisadmi. moxsenebaSi Cven ganvixilavTzogierT aRmosavleTqristianul "gamosaxuleba-paradigmas~ da maT Soris ramdenime umniSvnelovanes qarTul magaliTsac.

ekaterine gedevaniSvili, marine yenia

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo sityvisa da gamosaxulebis urTierTmimarTebis sakiTxisaTvis Sua saukuneebis qarTul kedlis mxatvrobaSi wminda xatebaTa Sinaarsis gaxsnaSi, saxviTi xerxebis garda, arsebiTi roli gamosaxulebaTa Tanmdev warwerebs eniWeba. gamosaxulebisa da teqstis urTierTmimarTebis sakiTxs Sua saukuneebis saxviT xelovnebaSi araerTi ucxoeli mkvlevaris naSromi mieZRvna (b. Selevaldi, l. brubeikeri, h. maguaieri, r. nelsoni da sxvani). qarTul mecnierebaSi, mxatvrobis ikonografiuli programis analizisas, Cveulebriv, sagangebo yuradReba eTmoba calkeul scenaTa ganmartebiT warwerebs, winaswarmetyvelTa da wm. eklesiis mamaTa gragnilebisa Tu satriumfo TaRebis warwerebs, romelTa gaTvaliswinebiT moxatulobis saerTo Teologiuri idea ixsneba (T. virsalaZe, a. volskaia, e. privalova, i. lorTqifaniZe, a. oqropiriZe, m. didebuliZe, z. sxirtlaZe da sxvani). qarTvel mkvlevarTa mier damuSavebuli masala Tu bolodroindeli kvlevis Sedegebi am problemis sagangebo Seswavlisa da monacemTa klasifikaciis saSualebas iZleva. winaswaruli daskvnebis safuZvelze Semdegi "funqciuri" jgufebis gamoyofaa SesaZlebeli: · martivi, lakoniuri ganmartebiTi warwerebi, romlebic gamosaxulebis raobas an vinaobas aRniSnavs - es yvelaze farTod gavrcelebuli tipis warwerebia, romlebic, erTi mxriv, sacnaurs xdis gamosaxulebas da, amasTan, mis pirvelsaxesTan mistikur kavSirs mowmobs. · gavrcobili, TxrobiTi ganmartebiTi warwerebi, romlebic ara mxolod azustebs, damatebiTi niuansebiTac amdidrebs gamosaxulebis sazriss. maTgan SeiZleba gamoiyos - e.w. "memorialuri" mniSvnelobis warwerebi (mag., martvilobis scenaTa ganmartebani), romlebic sityvieri formiT avrcobs gamosaxulebis Sinaarss; aseve SedarebiT iSviaTi tipis warwerebi, romlebsac pirobiTad "fsiqologiuri" SeiZleba vuwodoT - amgvari ganmartebani, Tavisi mxatvruli formiT, mnaxvels/mkiTxvels gamosaxuli movlenis Tanamonawiled aqcevs. · warwerebi, romlebic moxatulobaTa ikonografiul programaSi sagangebo Teologiur maxvilebs gamokveTs. am tipisaa, mag., rogorc calkeuli gamosaxulebis Tanmdevi warwerebi, ise mxatvrobis saerTo ansamblSi CarTuli liturgiuli teqstebi, citatebi Tu perefrazebi saRmrTo werilidan (winaswarmetyvelTa, wm. eklesiis mamaTa gragnilebis teqstebi Tu satriumfo TaRebis warwerebi) - am warweraTa erTobliobiT

53

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

ixsneba mxatvrobis dogmatur-simboluri sazrisi. warweraTa zemoxsenebuli jgufebis gavrcelebis qronologiuri sazRvrebi vrcelia, mravalferovania maTi gamoyenebis wesic: zogan erTi romelime "funqciis" warwerebia warmodgenili, romlis Tanadrouladac ramdenime "funqciuri" jgufis Tanaarseboba dasturdeba.

ori soltesi

jorjTaunis universiteti. aSS "raindobis" xelovneba da misi konteqsti

"vefxistyaosani" qarTuli erovnuli eposis tipiuri nimuSia. moxsenebaSi warmodgenili iqneba sami erTmaneTTan mWidrod dakavSirebuli sakiTxi. pirveli aris is, Tu ratom aris poema eposi, romelic Sinaarsisa da stilis mixedviT SesaniSnavad jdeba dasavluri eposis tradiciis istoriaSi, moyolebuli uZvelesi aRmosavleTidan da gilgameSis eposidan, damTavrebuli italiuri aRorZinebiTa da tasos "ierusalimi mirTmeuliaTi". moxseneba aseve exeba im sakiTxs, Tu ra aris eposaTvis saxasiaTo elementebi - saxismetyveleba, riTmis forma, sagmiro ganwyoba, erTmaneTSi Caqsovili sasiyvarulo da sabrZolo pasaJebi, RvTiuri gangebis roli; aseve imas, Tu rogor aris yovelive es asaxuli qarTul poemaSi. meore sakiTxi ukavSirdeba imas, Tu ramdenad unikalurad qarTulia poema, romelic qarTuli kulturis Rirebulebebsa da Taviseburebebs asaxavs; rogoria gmiris buneba kulturuli da religiuri TvalsazrisiT, da rogor asaxavs Tavad gmiri da misi istoriiT wamoWrili kiTxvebi im socialurad da religiurad mravalferovan garemos, romelSic poema Seiqmna. sxvagvarad rom vTqvaT, ramdenad asaxavs "vefxistyaosani" qarTul bunebas, Semwynareblobas da sxvadasxva kulturaTa da tradiciaTa gadakveTaze myofi qveynis xasiaTs. zemoaRniSnuli ori sakiTxi safuZvels udebs mesames, romelic Seexeba eposis mxatvrul gaformebas -miniaturebsa da ilustraciebs, romlebic (zemoxsenebuli ori sakiTxis gaTvaliswinebiT) aseve mosalodnelia, rom sxvadasxva gavlenebsa da imavdroulad adgilobriv niSnebs asaxavdes. moxsenebaSi ganxiluli iqneba vefxistyaosnis XV-XVIII saukuneebis miniaturebi msgavseba amave periodis iranul, Turqul da evropul gamosaxulebebTan, da is sakiTxic, Tu maTgan romeli SeiZleba SevadaroT "vefxistyaosnis" mxatvrul gaformebas da ratom.

mariam didebuliZe

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo saero tendenciebi Tamaris epoqis kulturaSi da Tanadrouli kedlis mxatvroba sayovelTaodaa aRiarebuli, rom Tamaris epoqis qarTul kulturaSi SeiniSneba saero ganwyobis sagrZnobi gaZliereba, rac yvelaze naTlad SoTa rusTvelis saxelganTqmul "vefxistyaosanSi" aisaxa da safuZveli misca mkvlevarebs "aRmosavluri renesansis" idea wamoeyenebinaT. msgavsi tendenciebi bizantiuri samyaros sxva nawilebSic iCens Tavs, gansakuTrebiT konstantinopolsa da masTan daaxloebul wreebSi. Tumca mainc sakamaToa, ramdenad SeiZleba im drois qarTul saxviT xelovnebaSi renesansuli mxatvruli tendenciebis amokiTxva dasavleTevropuli gagebiT. marTlac, Tu Tamaris epoqis kedlis mxatvrobis nimuSebis mixedviT, gansakuTrebiT ki maTi programebis SemadgenlobiT vimsjelebT, romlebSic marTlmadideblobis triumfisa da mwvaleblobebTan dapirispirebis ideebi Warbobs, da romlebic ganmartoebul savaneebsa da asketuri monastrebis taZrebs amkobs, grZnobad-sagnobrivisa da miwieri sawyisis prioriteti nakleb SeigrZnoba. Tu maincdamainc, saubari ufro individualur-pirovnulis gamZafrebul gancdaze

54

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

SeiZleba, romelic kvlav RmerTTan ufro Rrma mistikuri kavSirisken ltolvaze miuTiTebs. xelovnebis nimuSebi Tamaris drois adamianTa fsiqologiis saintereso xedvas gvTavazobs - erTgvarad gaorebulsa da ambivalenturs, RmerTis mistikuri wvdomis gamZafrebuli gancdiT da, amvadroulad, amqveyniuris "danaxviT", Tumca saeklesio xelovnebaSi "es qveyana" gaiazreba swored rogorc uflis qmnileba da misi madliT gamSvenierebuli.

pavlos florentosi

siZveleTa departamenti. kviprosi bizantiuri mozaika da kedlis mxatvroba kviprosis taZrebSi kviprosze qristianobis gavrcelebas Tan axlda iatakis da kedlis mozaikiT mdidrulad morTuli taZrebis mSenebloba. mozaikis nimuSebia panagia kanakariasa da panagia angeloktistosis taZrebis VI saukunis sakurTxevlis mozaikebi RmrTismSobel mariamis gamosaxulebiT.arabTa SemosevebiT gamowveuli dacemis xangrZlivi periodis Semdeg, kunZuli kvlav moeqca bizantiis mmarTvelobis qveS, ramac xeli Seuwyo konstantinopolis gavleniT aRbeWdili xelovnebis gavrcelebas. XI-XII saukuneebSi, kviprosi ayvavebis axal xanaSi Sevida, rac naTlad aisaxa kunZulis mTel teritoriaze eklesia-monastrebis mSeneblobaSi. kedlis mxatvrobis iseTi nimuSebi, rogoricaa panagia forviotisa panagia tu arakosi, aios nikolaos tis stegis da aios ioanis lapmpaditis im periodis konstantinopolur, kerZod komnenosTa xelovnebis stilTan mWidro kavSirze miuTiTebs. frankebis samefom, romelic kviprosSi 1192 wlidan darsda qveyanaSi dasavluri tipis feodaluri sistema Semoitana. kedlis mxatvrobis mravali Zegli - panagia forviotisa, aios nikolaos tis stegis, panagia (moutoulasi) da wminda jvari asaxavs qtitorebs, romelTac dasavluri yaidis samosi acviaT. veneciis mmarTvelobis periodSi (1472-1571) mTavarangeloz miqaelisa da wminda jvris agiasmatis taZrebis kedlis mxatvroba siaxloves amJRavnebs konstantinopolSi gavrcelebul paleologosur stilTan, aseve zogierTi niSniT enaTesaveba e.w. "jvarosanTa" xelovnebas, romelic ZiriTadad dasavleTidan wamosuli ostatebis mier bizantiuri mxatvrobis adgilobrivi tradiciebis safuZvelze SemuSavda palestiSi. da bolos, veneciuri mmarTvelobis dros kedlis mxatvroba ori mimarTulebiT ganviTarda. erTi mxriv, panagia podiTous mxatvroba misdevs kviprosis italo-bizantiur skolas, romelmac moaxdina klasikuri bizantiuri elementebis sinTezi italiuri aRorZinebis niSnebTan, meore mxriv, macxovris feriscvalebis taZris moxatuloba asaxavs individualurad gamomJRavnebul paleologosur reminiscenciebs.

aleqsandra davidov temerinski

kulturuli memkvidreobis dacvis instituti. serbeTi esqatologia, ideologia da konteqstualizacia: saSineli samsjavros scenebi deCanSi, axtalasa da timoTesubanSi saSineli samsjavros unikalur da gavrcobil cikls, romliTac morTulia deCanis monastris kaTolokonis pantokratoris taZris naosis dasavleT nawili, uaxloesi paraleli saqarTveloSi, ufro adreuli taZrebis - axtalisa (1205-1216) da timoTesubnis

55

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

(1205-1215) moxatulobaSi moepoveba. am moxsenebaSi am fenomenis axsnas Sevecdebi. saqarTvelosa da serbeTs Soris arsebuli geografiuli daSorebisa da Sua saukuneebSi am or saxelmwifos Soris politikuri da kulturuli urTierTobebis arqonisas erTgvar mxatvrul ,,gacvla-gamocvlaze" saubari gamoricxulia. deCanis, axtalisa da timoTesubnis taZrebis saSineli samsjavros msgavseba SeiZleba aixsnas am taZrebis moxatvis droisaTvis serbeTisa da saqarTvelosaTvis saerTo, msgavsi ideologiuri konteqstiT. am sami Zeglidan arcerTSi ar aris aqcentirebuli didaqtikuri an moraluri mxare, Tumca, rogorc wesi, es mogviano bizantiuri xelovnebis bolo periodis «saSinel samsjavroTa» erT-erTi yvelaze damaxasiaTebeli niSania. bizantiuri magaliTebisgan gansxvavebiT, serbul da qarTul ZeglebSi xazgasmulia WeSmaritebis dogmaturi arsi da marTlmadidebluri rwmena. moxsenebis mizania, aseve, kvlav gadavxedoT Cvens codnas bizantiur xelovnebasa da kulturaSi «saSineli samsjavros» gamosaxulebis Sesaxeb. imis gamo, rom aRniSnuli kompozicia, rogorc wesi, taZris dasavleT nawilSi gamoisaxeboda, is ki, Tavis mxriv, yvelaze xSirad ganicdida ngrevasa da aRdgenas, monumentur ferweraSi saSineli samsjavros scenis ganviTareba da Camoyalibebis xazi Tu mTilanad ara, nawilobriv mainc, ucnobi rCeba. amdenad, am scenis ueWveli ,,tipiuri niSnebis" gansazRvrisas jer kidev mravali kiTxva Cndeba, romelTac pasuxi meti sifrTxiliT unda gaeces.

ida sinkeviCi

lafaiet koleji. aSS freskuli xatebi qarTul da bizantiur monumentur xelovnebaSi: maTi arsi da mniSvneloba rogorc bizantiis, ise misi gavlenis qveS myofi qveynebis monumentur xelovnebaSi vxvdebiT kedelze daxatul, freskul e.w. fiqtiur xatebs. aRniSnul xatebs, romlebic XI saukunidan Cndeba, wriuli an oTxkuTxa forma aqvs. xsenebuli gamosaxulebebi wmindanTa figurebs xatis realisturad gadmocemul CarCoSi warmogvindens. realuri, dasakidi xatis imitaciis Sesaqmnelad CarCoebze xSirad Camosakidi kavis gamosaxulebasac ki vxvdebiT. qarTuli Zeglebis garda, aRniSnul freskul xatebs vxvdebiT oxridis wm. sofias eklesiaSi, baCkovos monasteris saZvleSi, kievis wm. kiriles monasterSi, jurjevi stupovSi, nerezSi da mistras eklesiebSi. miuxedavad imisa, rom cnobebis simcire xels uSlis am gamosaxulebebis warmoSobisa da pirvelwyaros dazustebiT gansazRvras, maTi gavrcelebis farTo geografiuli areali: makedoniidan - serbeTamde, ruseTidan - saqarTvelomde, warmoSobs varauds, rom aRniSnuli xatebis saTuo, Tumca SesaZlo warmoSobis adgilad bizantiis dedaqalaqi - konstantinopoli unda ganvixiloT. kalender hane jameSi msgavsi xatebis arseboba aRniSnul mosazrebas ufro sarwmunos xdis. eklesiis moxatulobaSi e.w. fiqtiuri xatebis gamosaxvas ufro xSirad xsnian, rogorc mcdelobas moqmedebis adgilis moniSvnisa da xatis sakraluri mniSvnelobis xazgasmisa. es dasturdeba qarTuli nimuSebiTac, Tumca qarTuli eklesiebis: berTubnis, beTaniis da yincvisis moxatulobaSi arsebuli magaliTebi aRniSnul xatebs damatebiT Sinaarssa da mniSvnelobas sZens. moxsenebis mizania saqarTvelos eklesiebis moxatulobaSi arsebuli freskuli xatebis kvleva da Sua saukuneebis xelovnebasa da kulturaSi maTi mravalmxrivi kulturuli rolis gansazRvra da Sefaseba.

56

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

irine mamaiaSvili

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo postbizantiuri mxatvrobis tendenciebi XVI s-is qarTul monumentur mxatvrobaSi XVI s-is qarTuli monumenturi mxatvrobis ZeglebSi sxvadasxva mxatvruli tendencia aRiniSneba. XV s-is bolos da XVI s-is dasawyisSi, mZime politikur da socialur pirobebSi, rodesac profesiul mxatvarTa ricxvi aSkarad Semcirebulia, Zlierdeba e.w. "xalxuri~ nakadi. niSandoblivia, rom am xanaSi, arc sxva marTlmadidebel qveynebSi aRiniSneba SemoqmedebiTi aqtivoba. "xalxursa~ da profesiul mxatvrobas Soris Sualedur xasiaTs atarebs gelaTis RmrTismSoblis taZris XVI s-is 20-ian wlebSi Sesrulebuli mxatvroba. masSi Cans kavSiri gvianpaleologosur ferwerasTan (figuraTa proporciebi, saxis tipi, tansacmlis nakecebis xasiaTi da damuSavebisas zogan kontrastuli feris gamoyeneba), magram, amasTan erTad, vlindeba niSnebi, romlebic Tanxvdeba "xalxuri~ mxatvrobis saxviT saSualebebs (kompoziciaTa xazgasmulad ateqtonikuri xasiaTi, gamartivebuli naxatis wamyvani mniSvneloba, formaTa ornamentul-dekoratiuli damuSaveba, gulubryvilo gamomsaxveloba). gamartivebisa da gaubraloebis tendencia, romelic dasaxelebul mxatvrobaSi aRiniSneba, saerTod axasiaTebs postbizantiuri mxatvrobis ganviTarebis adreul etaps. postbizantiuri mxatvrobis wamyvani dinebis, kretul-aTonuri skolis gavlena aSkarad Cans kaxTa mefis levanis (1520-1574), imereTis mefis bagrat III-is (1510-1565) da misi Zis giorgi II-is (1565-1583) dakveTiT Sesrulebul moxatulobebSi (alvanis, gremis, nekresis, axali SuamTis, gelaTis RvTismSoblis taZris da wm. giorgis eklesiis XVI s-is II naxevris mxatvroba). garTulebuli da datvirTulia ikonografiuli programebi, SeTvisebulia saqarTvelosTvis axali ikonografiuli Temebi. miuxedavad amisa, aTonur da sxva marTlmadidebeli qveynebis moxatulobebTan Sedarebisas (rumineTi, ruseTi, serbeTi), qarTuli mxatvrobani naklebadaa gadatvirTuli gavrcobili ciklebiT, wmindanTa uamravi gamosaxulebiT. drois saerTo tendenciebis farglebSi, adgilobriv tradiciasTan kavSiris maCveneblad SeiZleba miviCnioT im wmindanTa gamosaxva, romelTa kulti gansakuTrebiT popularulia saqarTveloSi; saqtitoro portretis Taviseburebani; moxatulobaTa stilis zogierTi niSani (miswrafeba mxatvrobis agebis mkafioebisken, kompoziciaTa lakoniuroba, naklebad Wreli feradovani gama). amrigad, XVI s-is qarTuli mxatvroba postbizantiuri xelovnebis saerTo kalapotSi viTardeba, Tumca, garkveuli niSnebiT igi inarCunebs kavSirs adgilobriv tradiciebTan.

beatriCe tolijiani

kolumbiis universiteti. aSS qarTuli gavlenebi grigol bakurianisZis mier bulgareTSi, plovdivis maxloblad daarsebuli monastris negebobaTa fasadebis morTulobaSi aleqsi I komnenosis mmarTvelobis dros, 1084 wels dasavleTis didma domestikosma (mTavarsardalma) - grigol bakurianisZem bulgareTSi, sof. stanimakos (dRevandeli asenovgradis) maxloblad daaarsa petriwonis RmrTismSoblis saxelobis (baCkovos) monasteri. grigol bakurianisZis iniciativiT agebuli nagebobebidan Cveni kvlevis

57

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

sagans warmoadgens baCkovos monastris saZvle da wm. giorgis "metoSkis" taZari. savaraudod, orive nageboba 1083-1086 wlebs Soris unda iyos agebuli. naSromSi mTavari aqcenti gakeTebulia am ori Zeglis fasadebis morTvis wesze, romelSic Tavs iCens Sua saukuneebis taZrebis fasadebis morTvis bulgareTisaTvis sruliad ucxo, Semotanili dekoratiuli sistema. sqema, romelic saerToa orive magaliTisaTvis warmoadgenilia ormagi CakveTili dekoratiuli TaRnariT, Ziritadi elementi SuaSi naxevarsvetis mqone pilastria, naxevarcilindris kveTis am svetebs uSualod, ukapitelod TaRebi agrZelebs, ase rom svetebica da TaRebic erTiani naxevarwriulad amoziduli "organizmis~ nawilebad warmogvidgeba. aRniSnuli dekoratiuli programa farTod aris gavrcelebuli kavkasiaSi, sadac is ZiriTadad gamoiyeneboda saeklesio nagebobebis eqsterieris mosarTavad, Tumca iSviaTad is interierSic mouxmariaT. mecnierebi ZiriTadad, taZris fasadebis morTvis am tradicias somxeTs miaweren., Tumca avtori asaxelebs ufro adreul, kerZod 864 wlis qarTul magaliTs. sxva amgvari qarTuli Zeglebi X da XI saukunis I naxevriT TariRdeba. kvlevis mizania grigol bakurianisZis mier bulgareTSi daarsebuli monastris xsenebuli ori Zeglis stilisa da funqciis da qarTuli Zeglebis SedarebiTi analizi, imisTvis, raTa warmoaCinos, rom es mxatvruli xerxi nasesxebia kavkasiis Sua saukuneebis taZrebis morTulobidan, romelTa Soris uadresi swored saqarTveloSi dasturdeba. fasadebis morTvis mxatvruli ideis kavkasiuri programidan sesxebis es precedenti saqarTvelosa da bulgareTis am mxaris qarTvel berTa saZmos mWidro urTierTobasTan, metadre ki monastris damaarsebelTa da saqarTvelos uaxloes kavSirTan SepirispirebiT iqneba ganxiluli.

Tamar xundaZe

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo istoriul pirTa gamosaxulebani Sua saukuneebis (VI-XI ss.) qarTul xuroTmoZRvrul qandakebaSi qristianuli samyaros Sua saukuneebis saxviT xelovnebaSi istoriul pirTa gamosaxulebebs mniSvnelovani adgili uWiravs. saqarTveloSi am Temis uadresi nimuSebi qvis reliefebze SemogvrCa. qarTul eklesiaTa fasadebze xSirad gvxvdeba qtitorTa - saero xelisufalTa da sasuliero pirTa, iseve rogorc mSenebelTa Tu ostatTa gamosaxulebani. maTi ganTavsebis adgili taZris xuroTmoZRvrul korpusze ar aris mkacrad reglamentirebuli - isini gamoikveTebian eklesiis kedlebis qveda nawilSic, kar-sarkmelTa Tavzec da gumbaTzec ki. istoriul pirTa reliefur gamosaxulebebs imTaviTve saTanado yuradReba mieqca qarTul saxelovnebaTmcodneo mecnierebaSi, g. CubinaSvilis, r. Smerlingis, l. rCeuliSvilis, n. CubinaSvilis, g. alibegaSvilis, n. aladaSvilis, a. volskaias, k. maCablis naSromebSi mniSvnelovani adgili eTmoba saqtitoro kompoziciebis mxatvrulstilistur analizsa da istoriul informacias. reliefTa Tanmxlebi warwerebisa da istoriuli wyaroebis Sejerebis Sedegad moxerxda bevri gamosaxulebis identifikacia. bolo oci wlis naSromebSi (n.aladaSvili, l. xuskivaZe, d. xoStaria, i. nikoleiSvili, g. gagoSiZis, i. giviaSvili, T. xundaZe da sxv.) ki meti interesi Cans saqtitoro kompoziciebis Sinaarsobriv-saxismetyvelebiTi konteqstis mimarT.

58

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

am reliefebis ZiriTad Temas adamianis sulis xsnisaTvis locva-vedreba da uflis mier misi kurTxeva warmoadgens. Tumca, am mTavari ideis farglebSi adgili aqvs Sinaarsobriv variaciebs, rac iwvevs kompoziciur sqemaTa mravalferovnebas - gvxvdeba macxovris, RmrTismSoblis, wmindanebis an angelozTa winaSe vedrebiT mimarTuli istoriuli pirebi; vedrebis an orantis pozaSi calke gamosaxuli figurebi; mravalricxovania istoriul pirTa figurebi eklesiis simboluri gamosaxulebiT xelSi makurTxeveli macxovris, Cviledi RmrTismSoblis, wmindanTa Tu winaswarmetyvelTa winaSe, aseve gvxvdeba gankiTxvis dRis kompoziciaSi CarTuli da calke warmodgenili erTi an ori qtitori eklesiis gamosaxulebiT; araerTi magaliTi gvaqvs jvris orsav mxares vedrebis JestiT mimarTuli istoriuli pirebisa, sadac Cans jvris Tayvaniscemis uZvelesi adgilobrivi tradicia. gvxvdeba erTeuli originaluri kompoziciebi, mag., sami istoriuli piri eklesiis gegmis win, eklesiis kurTxevis scena, liturgiuli msvleloba, cxenebze amxedrebuli istoriuli pirebi da sxv. mravalferovani azrobrivi da kompoziciuri interpretaciiT xasiaTdeba xuroTmoZRvar-ostatTa gamosaxulebanic - isini xan vedrebis pozaSi, xan - samuSao iaraRebiT, xanac - muSaobis procesSi gamoisaxebian. araerTgvarovania agreTve Sua saukuneebis qarTuli saqtitoro reliefebis stiluri Sesruleba, sadac vlindeba sxvadasxva epoqaTa Tu regionTa maxasiaTebeli gansxvavebuli mxatvrul-esTetikuri niSnebi da gemovneba.

ekaterine kvaWataZe

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo XI saukunis Semdgomi periodis qarTuli Sua saukuneebis safasade skulpturis ZiriTadi tendenciebi XI s-is bolodan qarTul qandakebaSi krizisis xana dgeba. swored amitom XI s-is Semdgomi xanis skulpturis istoriis es xangrZlivi periodi met-naklebad xelovnebaTmcodneTa yuradRebis miRma darCa. jerac rTulia, momdevno saukuneebis plastikis ganviTarebisa Tu problematikis mTeli sisruliT gaanalizeba, magram ukve SesaZlebeli unda iyos am epoqis reliefuri skulpturis Sesaxeb erTgvari mosazrebebi mainc gamovTqvaT. saukuneebis manZilze (XII-XVI saukuneebSi) qarTuli taZrebis gare kedlebze erTiani ideiT gamoxatul, fasadTa gamamTlianebel siuJetur kompoziciebs veRar vxvdebiT. isini naklebadac iqmneboda da, nawilobriv, albaT, JamTa siavis gamoc, ver SemorCa (gansakuTrebiT XIV-XV ss-Si). am saukuneebis Semonaxul eklesiaTa (fitareTi, kazreTi, erTawminda, wuRruRaSeni, dmanisis sioni, maRalaanT eklesia, safara, sadgeri, CiTaxevis samreklo da sxv.) fasadebze, umetesad erTmaneTTan daukavSirebeli, mxolod calkeuli reliefuri kompoziciebi Tua saxilveli. sxvadasxva rigis ostatobiT Sesrulebuli es, umeteswilad mcire zomis, safasade reliefebi, romlebic xSirad ornamentaciis wnulSia Caqsovili, Tavisi erTgvari miniaturulobiT mcire plastikis ZeglebTan amJRavnebs siaxloves; es ki, bunebrivia, safasade skulpturisTvis damaxasiaTebeli monumenturobis Zalis damakninebelia. gamosaxulebaTa dekoratiuli xasiaTis miuxedavad, am, xSirad simbolur-Teologiuri SinaarsiT datvirTuli skulpturuli

59

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

reliefebiT arqiteqturis sakralurad mniSvnelovani adgilebia gamaxvilebuli. Semdgom etapze ki - gviani Sua saukuneebis (XVII-XVIII ss.) mqandakeblobis mxatvrul (erT-erT) amocanad monumenturi safasade skulpturis sistemis Seqmnis mcdeloba daisaxa. gviani Sua saukuneebis pirveli Zegli, sadac, mTeli simZlavriT "amoifrqva" Sua saukuneebis qarTul safasade plastikaSi ase didi xniT miviwyebuli, erTiani mxatvruli programiT, rTuli saRvTismetyvelo SinaarsiT gaerTianebuli reliefuri gamosaxulebebi, ananuris taZaria. uSualod ananurs mosdevs sagarejos petre-pavles eklesiis safasade dekoric, iseve rogorc ananurTan axlos dgas yincvisis "gigos saydari", gamorCeulia leCxumis "mcxeTa". skulpturuli Ziebebi, romlebic qarTul plastikaSi XI s-is Sua xanebSi wydeba, arc gvian Sua saukuneebSi (XVII-XVIII ss-Si) xdeba gamococxlebuli SemoqmedebiTi Zalebis mTavari mamoZravebeli. qvis qandakebis mxatvruli Ziebebis amosavali eklesiis fasadTa Teologiuri SinaarsiT gamTlianebuli skulpturis programis Seqmna-aRorZinebaa. triumfalur-esqatologiuri niSniT aRbeWdili jvrebis mklavebqveS "iSleba" taZrebis safasade programaTa Zveli Tu axali aRTqmiseuli saxeebiT gajerebuli reliefuri dekoris umTavresi idea. gviani Sua saukuneebis reliefuri skulpturis mxatvruli stili iseve araerTmniSvnelovani da araerTgvarovania, rogorc am epoqis, rig SemTxvevebSi, aratipiur-araordinaruli, Znelad "wasakiTxi" ikonografia.

peter grosmani

arqeologiis germanuli instituti qairoSi, germania romauli da gvianromauli elementebi egviptis adreqristianul arqiteqturaSi saqarTvelos viTarebasTan SepirispirebiT avgustusis periodidan moyolebuli egvipte romis imperias ekuTvnoda. IV saukuneSi da kidev ufro adrec, egviptelebma uari Tqves diad "faraonul" tradiciaze da TavianT arqiteqturul garemoSi elinisturi da romauli elementebi Seitanes. maT arqiteqturaSi wayvani romauli stili gaxda, Tu ar CavTvliT mcirericxovan gamonaklisebs, romlebic ufro xangrZlivi istoriis mqone tradicias misdevdnen. adreqristianuli arqiteqturis taZris uadresi tipi - bazilika, romelic mTels msoflioSia gavrcelebuli, egvipteSi winaqristianul formas inarCunebs. egviptis centraluri gegmarebis taZrebis umetesoba ucxoeTidan Semotanil models misdevs, maTi arqiteqturuli morTuloba ki bizantiis imperiis dedaqalaqis - konstantinopolis gavlenis kvals atarebs. saqarTveloSi mkveTrad gansxvavebul suraTs vxvdebiT. saqarTvelo arasdros yofila romis imperiis nawili. qarTuli saeklesio xuroTmoZRvreba gansxvavdeba bizantiis imperiis gavleniT nasazrdoebi arqiteqturisagan. aq bazilikis tipis taZrebi iSviaTad gvxvdeba, centraluri gegmarebis mqone nagebobebi ki, rogorc Cans, saqarTveloSi ufro adre gavrcelda vidre imperiis sxva nawilebSi. amasaTan, qarTuli taZrebis umetesoba qviT aris nagebi, xolo maTi morTuloba tipiurad qarTulia. romauli (bizantiuri) gavlenebis kvals mxolod iSviaT SemTxvevebSi vxvdebiT.

60

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

jon vilkinsoni

britaneTis arqeologiis skola ierusalimSi. didi britaneTi sad Caisaxa qarTuli eklesia? 1995 wels gamimarTla da wilad mxvda bedniereba profesor vaxtang beriZes Sevxvedrodi. cameti wlis manZilze uZvelesi eklesiebis Sesaxeb misi naSromis kiTxvam didi codna SemZina. ar vici ramdenad dameTanxmeboda qvemoT moyvanil mosazrebaSi, Tumca erTi ram udaoa, rom guldasmiT momismenda. sayovelTaod miCneulia, rom eklesiaTa forma bazilikidan unda momdinareobdes. Tumca, am mosazrebas safuZvlad is udevs, rom XIX saukuneSi mecnierebis centri iyo romi. romis gavlena igrZnoba yvelgan, radgan swored romSi gamoica pirveli wignebi xelovnebaze, romelTa done nebismieri standartis gaTvaliswinebiT saukeTeso iyo. Tavis mxriv, romael avtorebze didi STabeWdileba moaxdina leon batista albertis (romelic aseve vatikanSi cxovrobda) naSromma arqiteqturaze. albertim Tavisi naSromi 1485 wels gamoaqveyna da pirvelad swored aq daistamba Teoria imis Taobaze, rom bazilika eklesiis formis pirvelwyaros warmoadgens. aris Tu ara eklesiis bazilikidan warmoSobis Teoria marTebuli? saqarTvelos SemTxvevaSi yuradReba unda mieqces sakurTxevlis ganlagebas, romelic yvela taZrisaTvis erTnairi ar aris. Tumca niSani, romelic sayovlTaoa aris proporcia, proporcia aRTqmis kidobnisa karvisa Tu ierusalimis taZrisa. amdenad, Cemi azriT, eklesiis arqiteqtura Tavdapirvelad efuZneboda im nagebobebs, romelTac mWidro kavSiri hqondaT sawamebelTan an Tavad taZris struqturasTan da es nagebobebi ebrauli sinagogebia.

irine giviaSvili

damoukidebeli mkvlevari. saqarTvelo qarTuli mravalafsidiani eklesiebi Cems mier Catarebuli kvlevis mizania mravalafsidiani eklesiebis saxeliT cnobili arqiteqturuli tipebis Sesaxeb arsebuli codnis Tavmoyra da am tipis eklesiaTa aRmocenebisa da ganviTarebis mizezebisa da etapebis gansazRvra. "mravalafsidianis~ saxeliT ganvixilavT Senobebs, romelTac afsidi edgmis ara mxolod aRmosavleTiT (sakurTxevlisaTvis), aramed ganiv RerZze (samxreTiT da CrdiloeTiT), aseve dasavleTiTac, anda gumbaTqveSa sivrcis irgvliv; am saxeliT erTiandeba is arqiteqturuli tipebi, rogoricaa trikonqi, tetrakonqi, xuTafsidiani, eqvsafsidiani da rvaafsidiani taZrebi. mravalafsidiani Senobebi ganxilulia aseve centrul mravalmklava taZrebTan Sedarebisasac. amgvari Senobebi an maTi nangrevebi SemorCenilia rogorc saqarTveloSi, ise istoriul tao-klarjeTSi (TurqeTi) da hereTSi (azerbaijani). qarTuli saxelovnebaTmcodneo skolis fuZemdeblis giorgi CubinaSvilis monografia " ~, Tbilisi, 1948, tetrakonqebis saqarTveloSi warmoSobisa da misi evoluciis Sesaxeb, zogadad qarTuli arqiteqturis kvlevis safuZvels warmoadgens. araerTi kvleva mieZRvna mravalafsidian qarTul eklesiTa calkeul nimuSebs, aseve calkeuli tipebis klasifikaciasa da gaanalizebas. rogorc winaswarma kvlevam aCvena, ama Tu im tipis saqarTveloSi gamoCena garkveuli

61

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

stilisturi moTxovnilebebis Sesabamisad xdeba. klasikuri periodis esTetika kargad tetrakonqul moculobas exameba. mravalafsidiani eklesiebis Senebis xana "gardamaval xanas" emTxveva, xolo trikonqis arqiteqturuli tipi axali masStabis moTxovnilebebs akmayofilebs da e.w. sakaTedro arqiteqturad ikidebs fexs. mravalafsidian taZarTa klasifikaciisas mniSvnelovania liturgiuli moTxovnilebebis gaTvaliswineba, rac iyo kidec ganmsazRvreli ama Tu im tipis taZarTa formebis da masStabebis Camoyalibebisas. am kuTxiT sainteresoa banas kaTedralis struqturuli analizi. qarTuli mravalafsidini eklesiebis kvleva SeuZlebelia mezobeli qveynebis, qristianuli aRmosavleTisa Tu adreqristianuli xanis paraleluri masalis Sedarebis gareSe, ufro metic, romauli tradiciebisa da qristeanobamdeli nimuSebis ganxilvis gareSe. kvlevam gviCvena, rom ama Tu im tipis Camoyalibeba da ganviTareba drois Sesabamisad da erTmaneTisagan damoukideblad mimdinareobda, Tumca mWidro kavSirisas da urTerTgavlenebisas mezobeli qveynebis sataZro arqiteqturasTan. Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelos sataZro arqiteqtura xom imave tipologiuri mravalferovnebiTaa warmodgenili, rogorc qristianuli aRmosavleTis saeklesio arqiteqtura.

qeTevan abaSiZe

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo safasade qvis wyoba qarTul saeklesio xuroTmoZRvrebaSi Tavisi sivrciT saqarTvelo evropis patara saxelmwifoebs emsgavseba. misi reliefi mravalferovnebiT xasiaTdeba. aq, SedarebiT mcire teritoriaze, TiTqmis yvela tipis bunebrivi landSaftia warmodgenili. mravalferovani da mravalsaxaa saqarTvelos buneba, klimati, mcenareuloba... Sesabamisad mravalnairi da mravalferadia qvebic - aq aris sxvadasxva feris da naxatis mqone mkvrivi marmariloebi, sarkesaviT gakrialebuli teSenitebi, oqrosferi tufebi, mwvane feris albitofirebi, muqi nacrisferi bazaltebi, nacrisferi, mowiTalo-iisferi andezitebi, nairferi kirqvebi da qviSaqvebi, travertinebi (Sirimi), fiqali... qvaTa jiSebis amgvari nairsaxeoba, cxadia, saqarTvelos geologiuri warsulis siZveleze metyvelebs. Sesabamisad, samSenelo kultura saukuneTa siRrmeebSi midis. moxsenebis Temaa safasade qvis wyoba Sua saukuneebis qarTul saeklesio xuroTmoZRvrebaSi. moxsenebaSi warmodgenilia saqarTveloSi nagebobaTa (ganurCevlad sakulto Tu sae-ro) safasade qvis wyobis xasiaTi, uZvelesi droidan vidre qristianul taZarTmSeneblobamde da Semdgom masTan uwyvet istoriul konteqstSi ganxilulia qarTuli saeklesio xuroTmoZRvrebis erT-erTi gamorCeuli, gansakuTrebuli Tviseba xazgasmulad mxatvruli SemoqmedebiTi muxtiT Sesrulebuli safasade qvis wyoba sxvanairad mas nagebobis (taZris) perangi, an taZris "Sesamoseli~ ewodeba. taZrebis qviT gamoqsovili "kvarTi~ uZveles adgilobriv samSeneblo tradiciebze dasaZirkvlda. qva, Tavisi feriTa da wyobiT, eklesiis, rogorc xuroTmoZRvruli mTelis saerTo saxis-xatis Seqmnisas, taZarTa fasadebis mamkob kveTil- nakvTian saxeebTan erTad erT-erTi mTavari "komponentia~ da mas Tanabrad konstruqciul-seismuri, mxatvrulesTetikuri da simboluri daniSnuleba aqvs.

62

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

daviT xoStaria

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo tao-klarjeTis arqiteqtura: istoria da Seswavlis perspeqtivebi tao-klarjeTis siZveleebis mimarT arqeologiuri interesi pirvelad XIX saukuneSi gaCnda (k. koxi, d. baqraZe, g. yazbegi, pr. uvarova). arqiteqturuli TvalsazrisiT tao-klarjeTis siZveleebi gamoikvlies a. pavlinovma, n. marma da e. TayaiSvilma. am ukanasknelma regionSi aTeulobiT taZari, monasteri da cixe-simagre moinaxula da Rirebuli masalac gamoaqveyna, romelic aRwerebs, fotoebsa da Canaxatebs Seicavs. pirveli msoflio omis Semdeg, tao-klarjeTis arqiteqturis Seswavla Sewyda, Tumca xangrZlivi periodis Semdg kvlav gagrZelda n. da m. tierebis, v. jobaZis, r. edvardsis da b. baumgartneris wyalobiT. 1980 wlidan tao-klarjeTis Zeglebis aRwerasa da kvlevaSi aqtiurad Caebnen m. kadiroRlu da sxva Turqi mkvlevarebic. 1980-iani wlebisTvis, tao-klarjeTis arqiteqturis kvleva qarTveli mecnierebisTvis prioritetul sferod iqca, Tumca, politikuri situaciis gamo qarTveli mkvlevarebi ver axerxebdnen e.w "TurqeTis saqarTvelos" siZveleebis adgilze Seswavlas. jer kidev 1930-ian wlebSi mianiSnebda g. CubinaSvili qarTuli ariqteqturis ganviTarebis istoriaSi tao-klarjeTis xuroTmoZRvrebis gansakuTrebul rolze. SemdgomSi, v. beriZem es roli kidev ufro srulad warmoaCina Tavis zogadi xasiaTis naSromSi. mxolod sabWoTa reJimis damxobis Semdeg moaxerxes qarTvelma mkvlevarebma TurqeTSi eqspediciebis mowyoba. ukanasknel wlebSi, tao-klarjeTis arqiteqturis kvlevaSi axali perspeqtivebi gamoikveTa. TurqeTis teritoriaze arsebuli qarTuli Zeglebis aRweris mizniT Seiqmna erToblivi Turqul-qarTuli jgufi (o. aitekini. i.elizbaraSvili). m. bogiSis ZalisxmeviT moxerxda tao-klarjeTisadmi dasavluri samecniero wreebis interesis xelmeored gamoRviZeba. swored amis Sedegi unda iyos, rom bizantiuri kvlevebis XXI saerTaSoriso kongresze, londonSi, specialurad tao-klarjeTisadmi miZRvnili sastendo moxsenebis wardgena moxda, rac am sakiTxis gamo sxvadasxva qveynis mecnierebis pirveli Sekreba iyo. 2007 wels stambulSi gamarTuli samuSao Sexvedra am mimarTulebiT kidev erTi win gadagmuli nabiji iyo. Sexvedram xeli Seuwyo saerTaSoriso multidisciplinaruli jgufis Camoyalibebas (f. bairami, d. xoStaria, i. giviaSvili, a. pikoki), romelic taoSi kvlevebis dawyebas 2008 wlis zafxulSi gegmavs.

bruno baumgartneri

venis universiteti. avstria ucnobi da naklebad cnobili qarTuli Zeglebi Crdilo-aRmosavleT TurqeTSi tao-klarjeTis (an zemo qarTlis, rogorc qarTvelebi moixseniebdnen md. Woroxisa da md. mtkvris zeda welSi mdebare terotorias) kvleva garkveul sirTuleebs ukavSirdeba, ramdenadac es teritoria ruseTsa da TurqeTs Soris moqceul regionSi mdebareobda. Cemi daintereseba tao-klarjeTiT 1982 wels aRmosavleT anatoliaSi turistuli mogzaurobisas daiwyo, romlis drosac pirvelad movinaxule taoklarjeTis iseTi mniSvnelovani Zeglebi, rogoricaa oSki, iSxani, xaxuli, dolisyana da eni rabaTi. momdevno wlebSi manqaniT kidev oTxjer moviare tao-klarjeTi. 1985, 1986, 1988 da

63

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

1990 wlebSi il. zdaneviCis mier naxsenebi TiTqmis yvela mniSvnelovani Zegli movinaxule. gzebis Tanamedrove rukebiTa da Turquli armiis rukebiT (Harta Genel Müdürlüü) aRWurvilma movaxerxe araTu TiTqmis yvela qarTuli Zeglis adgilmdebareobis gansazRvra, aramed maTi umetesi nawilis azomva da fotografirebac. 1989 wels Cems mier klarjeTSi Catarebuli kvlevis angariSi warvadgine qarTuli xelovnebis saerTaSoriso simpoziumze, TbilisSi. momdevno wlebis ganmavlobaSi ramdenime werili gamovaqveyne avstriasa da safrangeTSi, 1997 wels ki venis universitetSi davicavi disertacia - "tao-klarjeTis istoriuli geografia", romelSic Tavmoyrilia tao-klarjeTis TiTqmis yvela taZris, monastrisa da cixesimagris aRwera da fotoebi. warmodgenil moxsenebaSi, pirvel rigSi, aRvwer ramdenime eklesias mtkvris xeobis zeda welSi kolas, artaanisa da javaxeTis provinciebSi. maTi umetesoba e. TayaiSvilis mere, anu XX saukunis dasawyisis Semdeg, Tanamedrove mecnierebs aRar unaxavT, esenia: Cikori, oTxTa eklesia, alagozi, skibeirehatuni, olTeki, eruSeTi, borki, sikiribi da gogubani. Sevexebi, aseve SedarebiT ucnobi eklesia-monastrebis meore mniSvnelovan jgufs, romelic mdebareobs md. bardizis, oltu penekis mdinaris xeobaSi. maT Sorisaa: leqsori, kalkusi, orTulis vanqi, bardizi, kopi, qoTrisi da bobisgeri.

markus bogiSi

kopenhagenis universiteti. dania ramdenime SeniSvna istoriuli taoSi (Crdilo-aRmosavleT TurqeTi) mdebare oSkis taZris "Cawerili jvris" tipis ZiriTadi nawilis Taobaze oSkis monastris mTavar taZars (963-73) gaaCnia cxra monakveTad dayofili ZiriTadi sivrce, romlis gumbaTis mzidic oTxi Tavisuflad mdgomi burjis meSveobiT iqmneba. arsebiTad, es kvadratSi Cawerili "jvris tipis" stuqturaa, Tumca ufro monumenturi masStabis nagebobaa. am tipis nagebobebi IX saukunidan farTod gavrcelda bizantiis imperiaSi. Tumca, maTi warmoSobis sakiTxi jer kidev sakamaToa. warsulSi Catarebuli sxvadasxva tipis kvleva moicavs rogorc evoluciis da socialur-ekonomikur Teoriebs, ise fenomenologiur interpretaciebs. am moxsenebis mizani, ara imdenad oSkis ZiriTad nawilsa da konstantinopolSi SemorCenili "Cawerili jvris" gegmarebis taZrebis formaluri an tipologiuri msgavsebis kvlevaa, aramed maTi qristianuli ekumenis sakraluri arqiteqturis zogad konteqstSi ganxilva. samxreT kavkasiasa da wminda miwas Soris tradiciulad arsebuli kavSirebis gaTvaliswinebiT, SevecdebiT warmovaCinoT is formaluri, konceptualuri da ideologiuri maxasiaTeblebi, romelic oSkis taZars ierusalimis zogierTi saxelganTqmuli eklesiis arqiteqturasTan akavSirebs.

nato gengiuri

SoTa rusTavelis saxelobis Teatrisa da kinos saxelmwifo universiteti. saqarTvelo qarTuli eklesiebis karibWeebi (adreqristianuli periodidan ganviTarebul Sua saukuneebamde) qarTuli arqiteqturis istoria mowmobs, rom saeklesio xuroTmoZRvrebis arsebobis yvela etapze taZris Sesasvlels gansakuTrebuli gulisyuriT udgebodnen, rac mis mxatvrul-arqiteqturul gaformebaSi gamoixata. karis mniSvneloba, romelic misi

64

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

mxatvruli gadawyvetiTaa xazgasmuli, zogadad qristianuli xuroTmoZRvrebisTvisaa saxasiaTo. aq gadamwyvetia sakulto nagebobis, iseve rogorc misi calkeuli nawilis simboluri gaazreba. es xazi mkafiod gamoixata Sua saukuneebis dasavleTevropul arqiteqturaSic da amave periodSi Seqmnil komentarebSi, sadac bibliuri nagebobebis gaazrebis ori forma realizdeba. esaa idealuri arqiteqturuli sivrcis verbaluri aRwera da am sivrcis alegoriuli gageba. yovelive aCvenebs sakulto arqiteqturis ormxriv mniSvnelobas, rac Sesasvlelis sakiTxsac unda davukavSiroT. ramdenadac taZris kedlebi gaiazreba ori samyaros - saaqaosa da sauflos simbolur sazRvrad, eklesiis Sesasvels sauflosTan Sexvedris saSualebis azri eZleva. amdenad, misi ganTavseba, eklesiis mTlian organizmTan da qveynierebis mxareebTan mimarTeba da mxatvrul-arqiteqturuli realizebis forma gansakuTrebul mniSvnelobas iZens. es is sakiTxebia, romelTa Seswavla qarTul saeklesio xuroTmoZRvrebasTan mimarTebaSic unda moxdes. saqarTveloSi met-naklebad mniSvnelovan eklesiebSi SesasvlelTan karibWis, rogorc calke arqiteqturuli moculobis aRmarTva savaldebulo iyo. arsebobs karibWis saxeoba, romelic yvela periodSi gvxvdeba. esaa oTx burjze dayrdnobili, sam mxares TaRebiT gaxsnili portiki. amis paralelurad, dasturdeba sxva formis karibWeebic. SesasvlelTa aqcentirebis xerxebi icvleba arqiteqturis stilisturi ganviTarebis kvalad. sxvadasxva istoriul etapze qarTul arqiteqturaSi karibWeTa ramdenime nairsaxeoba dasturdeba. TvalsaCinoa, rom konkretul periodSi karibWis romelime erT formas eniWeba upiratesoba. adreqristianul xanaSi Sesasvlels burjze an burjebze gadasrolili TaRebiT gamoyofen. V-VIIss-Si umeteswilad karibWe calke arqiteqturul moculobad ar aris gamoyofili. is garSemosavlelis erTian "dinebaSia~ CarTuli (bolnisis sioni, qvemo bolnisi, kondamiani, vazisubanis bazilika, olTisi, tabakini da a.S.) gardamaval xanaSi, erTi mxriv, SenarCunebulia karibWis Zveleburi forma da, meore mxriv, mimdinareobs Zieba axali, samnawiliani karibWis Seqmnis mimarTulebiT. VIII-IX ssSi dasturdeba karibWeebis formaTa variaciebi (ambara, cxvariWamia, dvani, vaCnaZianis yvelawminda). am Ziebebis Sedegad yalibdeba momwifebul Sua saukuneebSi popularuli karibWis saxeoba, romelic samnawiliani arqiteqturuli moculobisagan Sedgeba da CuqurTmebiT mdidruladaa gaformebuli. aseTi karibWe moicavs centrSi amaRlebul, frontoniT dasrulebul nawils da gverdiT frTebs, romelnic naklebi simaRlisaa da calferda saxuraviTaa gadaxuruli. isini XI s-dan moyolebuli gvxvdeba, rogorc gumbaTovan, ise ugumbaTo arqiteqturaSi (zemo krixi, maRalaanT eklesia, manglisi, beTania, qvaTaxevi, da a. S.).

irma berZeniSvili

saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi - arqeologiuri kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo afxazeTis adre Sua saukuneTa saeklesio xuroTmoZRvreba afxazeTis adre Sua saukuneTa saeklesio xuroTmoZRvreba metwilad arqeologiuri gaTxrebis Sedegad gamovlenili arqiteqturuli ZeglebiTaa warmodgenili. cnobilia, rom aRniSnuli regioni, romis imperiisagan devnili pirveli qristianebis gadasaxlebis adgils warmoadgenda, rac, garkveulwilad, xelisSemwyobi faqtori iyo aq axali, qristianuli mrwamsis gasavrceleblad. dReisaTvis afxazeTSi adreqristianuli xanis 26 arqiteqturuli Zeglia gamovlenili, romelTa qronologiuri CarCo IV-VIII saukuneebSi Tavsdeba.

65

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

uZvirfases Zegls regionisaTvis, ra Tqma unda, biWvinTa warmodgens, sadac, savaraudod, ukve III s-is miwurulidan arsebobda organizaciulad gaformebuli adreqristianuli Temi, rac arqeologiuri aRmoCenebiTac dadasturda. IV-VI ssSi biWvinTasa da mis midamoebSi 9 qristianuli taZari Sendeba, VI s-dan ki aqtiurad iSleba saeklesio mSenebloba afxazeTis mTel teritoriaze, rogorc zRvispira zolSi (ganTiadi, gagra, anakofia, miusera, soxumi, oCamCire, gudava), aseve afxazeTis mTiswina da mTian regionebSi (xaSufse, lixni, dranda, jgerda, webelda, Sapka, mramba). swored saeklesio mSeneblobas ukavSirdeba mrambaSi, webeldaSi, anakofiaSi, soxumSi, kulambasa da drandaSi aRmoCenili qristianul siuJetebze reliefuri skulpturis Zeglebi. afxazeTis teritoriaze gamovlenili adreqristianuli sakulto arqiteqtura, ZiriTadad, bazilikuri tipis ramdenime variantiTaa warmodgenili: ornaviani bazilika (biWvinTa), samnaviani bazilika (biWvinTis #2 da #3 eklesiebi, alahaZe, ganTiadi, soxumi) da sameklesiiani bazilika (gagra, miusera, abaanTa, qiaC-aba). garda amisa, warmodgenilia darbazuli tipis eklesia (biWvinTa, anakofia, gienosi, webeldis #2 da #3 eklesiebi, mramba, Sapka, xaSufse), baptisteriumi, rogorc calke mdgomi Senoba (gudava) da jvargumbaTovani tipis taZari (dranda). afxazeTis adreqristianul saeklesio xuroTmoZRvrebaSi kargad Cans dasavluri da aRmosavluri samSeneblo tradiciebis Serwyma. samSeneblo teqnikis mxriv afxazeTis Zeglebi konstantinopolisa da mcire aziis zRvispira regionis Zeglebs uaxlovdeba; meore mxriv, isini garkveul msgavsebas avlens mcire aziis Sida regionis ZeglebTan. afxazeTSi arsebul ZeglTa kompleqsuri kvleva dReisaTvis ramdenadme garTulebulia Seqmnili politikuir situaciis gamo; Tumca, cnobilia, rom arqeologiuri kvlevaZieba afxazeTSi dRes, da gansakuTrebiT, bolo xuTi wlis ganmavlobaSi, sakmaod aqtiurad mimdinareobs - afxazeTSi rusul-afxazuri eqspedicia muSaobs, romelmac aqamde ucnobi araerTi arqeologiuri Zegli gamoavlina, romelTac metad mohfines Suqi regionis siZveleTa kvlevasTan dakavSirebul sakiTxebs da rigi axali sakiTxebic wamoWres. friad samwuxaroa, rom es samuSaoebi qarTuli mxaris sruli ugulebelyofiT da ignorirebiT mimdinareobs.

edit noibaueri

laipcigis universiteti. germania Sua saukuneebis qarTuli arqiteqtura da skulptura da romanuli periodi centralur evropaSi saqarTveloSi qristianoba saxelmwifo religiad jer kidev 337 wels gamocxadda. warmarTuli kerpebi ganadgurda da, xSir SemTxvevaSi, maT adgilas RvTismsaxurebisa da naTlobisaTvis qristianuli taZrebi aRimarTa, anu aq saqme gvaqvs fenomenTan, romelic "kultmsaxurebis adgilis uwyvetobis" saxeliT aris cnobili. maSin ar arsebobda qristianuli taZrebisTvis rame savaldebulo nimuSi.. IV-VII saukuneebSi qarTvel xuroTmoZRvarTa sazrianoba-gonebamaxvilobis wyalobiT bazilikisa da jvargumbaTovani taZris mravali sxvadasxva varianti Seiqmna. centruli gumbaTovani taZrebi (mcxeTis jvari 586/87-604/05) da jvargumbaTovani taZrebi calke mdgomi oTxi svetiT (wromis macxovris taZari 626-34) axleburi, aRmosavleT qriatianuli samyarosaTvis unikaluri variaciebia. am mniSvnelovan monapovarTa SemweobiT saqarTvelos bizantiisagan damoukidebloba warmoCinda.

66

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

adreqristinuli xuroTmoZRvrebis damaxasiaTebeli niSansagani reliefuri qandakebis gamoyenebaa, rac meoTxe saukunis bazilikebSic gvxvdeba, Tumca Tavdapirvel periodSi gansazRvruli koncefciis gareSe. jvarSi da wromSi SemTxveviToba ukve gamoricxulia, vinaidan nagebobis yoveli nawilis morTuloba dadgenili ideologiuri programis mixedviT aris Sesrulebuli. am mimarTulebiT imedismomcemi ganviTareba arabebis 200wlianma mmarTvelobam Sewyvita. X saukune qristianuli arqiteqturisa da, amasTanave, monumenturi skulpturis aRorZinebis xanaa. meore mniSvnelovani niSani reliefis taZris portalis timpanze gamoyenebaa. adreqristianul qveynebSi saeklesio xuroTmoZRvrebasTan mimarTebaSi reliefiT morTuli timpani mxolod saqarTvelosa da somxeTSi gvxvdeba. qarTuli da germanuli romanuli periodis wirTlebis, moCarCoebebis da mxatvruli programebis Sedareba gasaocar msgavsebas aCevenebs. gamoZaxilia es Tu paraleluri gadawyveta? aqamde monumenturi stilisa da reliefis ganviTarebas eklesiaTa fasadebTan mimarTebaSi gansakuTrebuli yuradReba ar eqceoda. 600 wlis axlos Sesrulebuli reliefi jvris aRmosavleT fasadze pioneruli qmnilebaa. misi antikurobasTan, urartus Tu aRmosavlur xelovnebasTan mimavali fesvebi jer kidev ar aris saTanadod Seswavlili. saqarTvelosa da somxeTSi monumenturi skulpturis ganviTarebuli stili Tavs X saukunis dasawyisSi, axtamarsa da oSkSi iCens. am impulsma bizantias, Zvel ruseTs, germaniasa da safrangeTsac miaRwia.

veronika kalasi

veinis saxelmwifo universiteti. aSS

iavuz ozkaia

arqiteqturis sarestavracio saxelosno "prometi". TurqeTi qarTuli aspeqti XIII saukunis anis arqiteqturaSi: tigran honencis taZari da minuCiris meCeTi tigran honencis taZari da minuCiris meCeTi TurqeTis Crdilo-aRmosavleT nawilSi mdebare Sua saukuneebis mitovebuli qalaqis - anis (romelic sxvadasxva periodSi bizantiis, somxeTis, saqarTvelosa Tu TurqeTis mflobelobaSi imyofeboda) umniSvnelovanes Zeglebs warmoadgens. TurqeTis kulturisa da turizmis saministros mier wamowyebuli kampaniis farglebSi, romelic amasTanave miznad isaxavda qveynis ganuviTarebeli periferiebisadmi yuradRebis mipyrobas, am ori umniSvnelovanesi Zeglis gadasarCenad Seiqmna specialuri komisia. 2006 wlis gazafxulsa da zafxulSi ankaraSi dafuZnebuli arqiteqturuli firmis - prometis mier Catarda tigran honencis taZrisa da e.w. meCeTis dokumentacia. am moxsenebaSi ganvixilavT am kvlevis zogierT mniSvnelovan moments, maT Soris naxazebs da samganzomilebian maketebs, romlebic am proeqtis farglebSi Seiqmna. Cven aseve SevexebiT imas, Tu ramdenad didi mniSvneloba SeiZleba mieniWos Sedgenil masStabur dokumentacias am regionis Sua saukuneebis (XIII s-is) arqiteqturis istoriis kvlevaSi. es ori Zegli warmoadgens TvalsaCino sabuTs XIII saukuneSi aRmosavleT anatoliasa da kavkasias Soris arsebuli kulturuli urTierTobebisa. Cven gansakuTrebul yuradRebas gavamaxvilebT am ori nagebobis qarTul aspeqtze da SevexebiT rogorc nagebobebis qronologias, teqnikas da stils, ise maT TviTmyofadobasTan, funqciasa da SinaarsTan dakavSirebul sakiTxebs.

67

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

rozmeri beisiki

oklahomas universiteti, aSS saqarTvelo da xorvatia: saerTo wyaros magaliTi moxsenebaSi ganxilulia TvalsaCino stilisturi elementebi, romelnic erTmaneTTan akavSirebs XI saukunis RmrTismSoblis xats wm. kvirikesa da ivlitas saxelobis lagurkas taZridan da XIII saukunis RmrTismSoblis xats spalatodan (spliti), xorvatiidan. miuxedavad imisa, rom es nimuSebi oficialurad sxvadasxva geografiuli da religiuri tradiaciis kuTvnilebaa, maT anaTesavebs saerTo stili, romelic am or nimuSSi asaxuli unikaluri da ekleqturi gamomsaxvelobiTi maneris Semqmneli ostatebis mier unda yofiliyo SemuSavebuli da savaraudod, gavrcelebulic. Cemi mizania, am ori nimuSis Seqmnis winapirobebis kvleva da ramdenime qvemoT moyvanil kiTxvaze savaraudo pasuxis SemoTavazeba: sad da rodis Camoyalibda aRniSnuli stili? aRiarebuli faqtia, rom X saukunidan qarTveli ostatebi uars amboben iudeopalestinur modelebze da mas konstantinopolis saeklesio tradiciiT anacvleben. am droisaTvis, bizantiis dedaqalaqi saxelganTqmuli iyo ikonografistebiT, romlebic sxvadasxva "inovaciur" stils qmnidnen da imperiis sxvadasxva nawilSi "nimuSebis wignebis" meSveobiT avrcelebdnen. aRniSnuli ostatebis savaraudod italiuri warmoSoba, rogorc amas xorvatiul nimuSSi vxvdebiT, ganapirobebda SemuSavebuli stilis "originalurobas" da mas Tavisebur - e.w. "maniera laTina"-s stilSi gardaqmnida. meore mxriv, qarTuli nimuSi erTdroulad amJRavnebs rogorc wminda bizantiuri stilis, ise "maniera laTina"-s saxasiaTo niSnebs. savaraudod, aRniSnuli nimuSebis gamomsaxvelobiTi enis wyaro unda iyos egviptis sinas udabnos mZlavri berZnuli kera - wm. ekaterines monasteri, sadac sxvadasxva mxatvruli saxelosnoebi xatebis Seqmnisa da gavrcelebis xangrZliv procesSi, aqtiurad monawileobdnen kulturulad da religiurad "gamravalferovnebuli" ikonografiis SeqmnaSi, gavrcelebasa da SenarCunebaSi.

leila xuskivaZe

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo ornamenti Sua saukuneebis qarTul WedurobaSi ornamentuli dekori Sua saukuneebis qarTuli xelovnebis yvelaze warmatebuli sferoTagania. am mxriv, xuroTmoZRvrebasTan erTad, gansakuTrebiT gamorCeulia oqromWedloba. es umdidresi da mravalferovani masala warmogvidgens Sua saukuneebis qarTuli ornamentikis rTul da araerTgvarovan suraTs. masSi aSkaradaa asaxuli Zveli aRmosavleTisa da berZnul-romauli samyaros tradiciebi da agreTve Sua saukuneebis mxatvruli kulturis saerTo miRwevebi. amave dros, aq gamovlenilia is Taviseburebebi, rac qarTveli ostatebis SemoqmedebiTma midgomam, maTma mdidarma fantaziam da ganviTarebulma dekoratiulma miswrafebebma moitana. qarTuli Weduri ornamenti, zogadad, garkveul kavSirs bizantiurTan amJRavnebs, magram masSi mimdinare stilisturi cvlilebebi - es, pirvel rigSi, exeba foTlovan-yvavilovan ornaments,

68

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

ufro berZnuli da dasavleT evropuli ornamentis evoluciur procesebTan iwvevs asociaciebs. qarTuli Weduri ornamentis mniSvnelovani roli imiTac ganisazRvreba, rom misi saSualebiT xerxdeba mxatvruli skolebisa da saxelosnoebis gamoyofa. Sua saukueneebis qarTuli Weduri ornamentis warmatebul ganviTarebas Tavisi wanamZRvrebi hqonda - erTi mxriv, saqarTvelos winaqristianuli xelovnebis mdidari tradiciebi, da, meore mxriv, xalxuri Semoqmedeba, gansakuTrebiT ki xeze kveTa. qarTuli Weduri ornamentis specialuri kvleva sxvadasxva mimrTulebiT unda warimarTos: ornamentuli motivebis dajgufeba qronologiuri ganviTarebis metnaklebi dacviT, maTi funqciis, simbolikis, stilis, Taviseburebebis, Sesrulebis teqnikuri xerxebis dadgena, rac SeiZleba farTo da mdidari paraleluri masalis moZieba, maTi mimarTeba gansakuTrebiT qarTul xuroTmoZRvrul dekorTan. amgvari Seswavlis Sedegad gamotanili daskvnebi gansazRvravs qarTuli Weduri ornamentis Rirseul adgils rogorc qarTuli, aseve msoflio ornamentuli dekoris istoriaSi.

maria lidova

Scuola Normale Superiore. italia liturgiuli sivrcis Seqmna: ioane cohabis mier Sesrulebuli sinuri xatebis jgufi moxseneba Seexeba eqvs xats, romelnic egvipteSi, sinas mTaze, wm. ekaterines monastris koleqciaSi inaxeba. oTxi maTgani kaledaruli xatia, mexuTeze gamosaxulia saSineli samsjavro, meeqvse ki RmrTismSoblis xuTi saswaulmoqmedi xatis da qristes saswaulebisa da vnebebis TxrobiTi ciklis unikaluri gamosaxulebaa. am xatTa TariRi XI saukunis bolosa da XII saukunis dasawyiss Soris meryeobs. xatebis es jgufi erT-erTi mowmobaa Sua bizantiur xanaSi sinas mTaze qarTveli berebis aqtiuri moRvaweobisa. qarTuli warmoSoba dasturdeba ara mxolod im eqspresiuli stiliT, romelic jer kidev moelis detalur analizsa da qarTul mxatvrobebTan Sedarebas, aramed orenovani warwerebiTac (yovel berZnul saxels Tan erTvis Sesabamisi qarTuli). mokle qarTuli warwera, romelic saSineli samsjavros scenaSi macxovris saydris qvemoT aris mocemuli, mRvdel ioane cohabs xatebis damkveTad warmogvidgens. igive saxeli - ioane, romelic mocemulia oTxi didi berZnuli epigramiT, xatebis ukana mxares amkobs. es berZnuli warwera Seusrulebia ostat-poets, romelic berZnuli teqstebisa da literaturis didi mcodne unda yofiliyo. miuxedavad imisa, rom es xatebi araerTxel ganixila sxvadasxva xelovnebaTmcodnem, garkveuli sakiTxebi gadauWreli rCeba. Catarebuli kvleva ZiriTadad calkeul xatebs ganixilavda. am moxsenebaSi Cven SevecdebiT xatebi ganvixiloT rogorc erTiani, erTmaneTTan mWidrod dakavSirebuli proeqti. Cveni azriT, sruliad dasaSvebia, rom eqvsive xati erTad yofiliyo warmodgenili, rac garkveul liturgikul sivrces qmnida da gansazRvravda. am erTianobas adasturebs rogorc daxvewili berZnuli epigramebi, ise maTi Taviseburi ikonografiuli programebi da stilisturi da tipologiuri msgavseba. xelnawerTa miniaturebTan da monumenturi mxatvrobis nimuSebTan SedarebiT SesaZlebelia sinas xatebis jgufis specialuri liturgikuli mniSvnelobis Cveneba. da bolos, am xatebs udidesi mniSvneloba eniWeba ormxrivi qarTul-bizntiuri urTierTobebis kvlevis sakiTxisaTvis.

69

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

nana burWulaZe

saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi. saqarTvelo qarTuli xatebi sinas mTis wm. ekaterines monasterSi (qarTul-bizantiuri urTierTobebis istoriisTvis) sinas mTasa da wm. ekaterines monasters gansakuTrebuli adgili ukavia qristianuli aRmosavleTis sasuliero centrebs Soris. qarTvelebi odiTganve miiltvodnen am wminda adgilisken - maTi iq yofnis kvali jer kidev VI saukuneSia dadasturebuli sinas mTaze qarTvelTa moRvaweoba gansakuTrebiT IX-X saukuneebSi gaaqtiurda. qarTveli ber-monazvnebis mier iq iwereboda da iTargmneboda saeklesio literaturis mravalricxovani Zeglebi, iqmneboda RvTivsulieri xatebi. xatweris nimuSTa sinur koleqciaSi saqarTvelodan Catanil-Sewiruli siwmindeebic aris. bolo xans qarTvel mecnierebs miecaT saSualeba SeeswavlaT sinaze daculi qarTuli xelnawerebi - gamoica am saunjis katalogic. rac Seexeba qarTul xatebs, maT Sesaxeb jer kidev Zalze mcire ramaa cnobili. cxadia, amgvar viTarebaSi metad aqtualuria wm. ekaterines monasterSi arsebuli TiToeuli qarTuli xatis gamovlena da Seswavla, vinaidan isini aRrmavebs codnas qarTvelTa sasuliero moRvaweobis Sesaxeb sinas mTaze. Zalze mniSvnelovania agreTve dokumenturi masalis Sekreba Tavis droze wm. ekaterines monastris kuTvnili, XIX saukuneSi rus koleqcionerTa mier wamoRebuli da aw ukve gamqrali xatebis Sesaxeb Cveni kvlevis saganic swored esaa. moxsenebaSi warmodgenili iqneba sinaze naklulad daculi erT-erTi mravalkaredi xati qarTuli warwerebiT, romelzec zogadad qristianuli eklesiis wmindanebTan erTad gamosaxuli arian "mnaTobni qarTvelTa" - asureli da aToneli wm. mamebi da sxva cnobili qarTveli sasuliero moRvaweebi. xatis adgilze Seswavla da masze arsebuli informaciis moZieba gviCvenebs, rom igi samecniero literaturaSi arasworadaa gaSuqebuli. xatze muSaobisas SevZeliT dagvedgina misi Semadgenloba da ikonografiuli programa, gamogvekvlia Sesrulebis teqnika da stili da SedarebiTi analizis safuZvelze es maRalmxatvruli nawarmoebi XIV saukunis pirveli naxevriT dagveTariRebina. amasTan, aRniSnuli mravalkaredis gamokvlevas davurTeT SeZlebisdagvarad sruli informacia sinaze odesRac da dResac daculi qarTuli xatebis Sesaxeb. vfiqrobT, rom Catarebuli kvlevis Sedegebi erTnairad saintereso da sasargeblo iqneba rogorc qarTuli xatweris, iseve sinas mTis wm. ekaterines monastrisa da -saerTod, marTlmadidebluri xatebis istoriisTvis.

aleqsandre saminski

andrei rubliovis muzeumi. ruseTi berTis saxarebis miniaturebi da misi warmomavloba berTis saxareba (Tbilisi, Q-906) misi mooqruli vercxlis ydis gamoa cnobili, romelic XII saukunis bolos opizis monasterSi oqromWedel beSqenis mier iqna Sesrulebuli. xelnaweri mezoblad mdebare berTis monasters Seswira berma ioane mTavraiZem, romelmac saxareba memkvidreobiT Zmisa da biZisagan miiRo. miuxedavad imisa, rom anderZi ar asaxelebs saxarebis gadaweris adgils, xelnaweris miniaturebi

70

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

Tavis warmoSobaze Tavad miuTiTeben. miuxedavad imisa, rom isini calke inaxeboda, miniaturebis gverdebis zoma da maT mindorze arsebuli nakeris naxvretebi, romlebic emTxveva xelnawerisas, miuTiTebs, rom isini Tavdapirvelad erT mTlian kodeqsad iyo akinZuli. berTis saxareblis wm. lukas gamosaxuleba Dumbarton Oaks-is koleqciaSi daculi XII saukunis miwurulis xelnaweri 4-is miniaturis zusti aslia. xelnawerebi msgavsia agreTve formatis, asoTa moyvanilobis da TiToeul gverdze moTavsebuli striqonebis raodenobis mxrivac. isini maxloblad mdebare monastrebSi unda iyos gadawerili. vaSingtonSi daculi miniaturebis maRalmxatvruli Sesruleba konstantinopolur warmoSobaze unda miuTiTebdes, Tumca wiTeli melniT SedarebiT mokrZalebulad Sesrulebuli TavsarTebi da pergamentis saSualo xarisxi sxva varaudebis SesaZleblobasac ar gamoricxavs. berTis saxarebis maxareblebis portretebi axlo msgavsebas amJRavnebs peterburgSi aRmosavleTmcodneobis institutSi dacul qarTul xelnawerTan E45. aRniSnul xelnawer wigns SesaZloa hqondes igive warmoSoba, rac berTisa da vaSingtonis saxarebebs. maTes gamosaxulebis qveS misi mflobelis mier Sesrulebuli berZnuli warwera miuTiTebs, rom 1832 wels saxareba berZnul garemoSi yofila. misi zogierTi TavsarTi axlo msgavsebas amJRavnebs antioqiaSi, XI saukuneSi Sesrulebul berZnul da qarTul xelnawer kodeqsebTan. erT-erTi am xelnawerTagania TbilisSi daculi kodeqsi - Q-371, romelic 1091 wels mRvdel ioane mTvaraiZis mier iqna gadawerili. amdenad, savaraudoa, rom berTis saxarebis mflobelis - ioane mTvaraiZis sagvareulos warsulSi garkveuli kavSirebi hqonda antioqiasTan.

nino qavTaria

xelnawerTa erovnuli centri. saqarTvelo XII-XIII saukuneebis qarTul oTxTavTa gaformebis mxatvruli aspeqtebi XII-XIII saukuneebis politikurma da kulturulma aRmavlobam ganapiroba qarTuli xelnaweri wignis mxatvruli donis amaRleba. qveynis SigniT Tu mis gareT arsebuli mravalricxovani samonastro kerebis skriptoriumebi akmayofilebdnen wignze, gansakuTrebiT ki xelnawer oTxTavze, gazrdil moTxovnilebas. moxsenebis mizania XII-XIII ss.-is qarTuli xelnaweri oTxTavebis mxatvruli aspeqtebis Cveneba. sayovelTaod cnobil xelnawerebis, gelaTis oTxTavTan-Q-908, jruWi II -H-1667Tan da vanis saxarebasTan A-1335 erTad Cven ganvixilavT XII-XIII ss. im xelnawerebs, romlebic naklebadaa cnobili da Seswavlili. maTi gaformeba ki mxolod dekoratiuli elementebiT (kamarebi, TavsarTebi, inicialebi) da maxarebelTa gamosaxulebebiT Semoifargleba (A-281, Q-906, Q-907, Q-929, H-1707, H-2075, H-1706 ­ XII s.; Q-883, Q-900, A-498, A-1563, Q-899 ­ XII-XIII ss.; A-138, A-494, S-110, A-26 ­XIII s) am xelnawerTa gaformebaSi naTlad gamoikveTa stilis ganviTarebis erTiani xazi, gaZlierebuli dekoratiuloba, formaTa sirbile, saerTo feradovneba, ornamentuli motivebis mravalferovneba da siuxve. imavdroulad, TvalnaTliv Cans ferweruli da grafikuli tendenciebis Serwyma. saerTo bizantiuri gavlenebis fonze, calkeul xelnawerTa gaformebaSi gamJRavnebulia adgilobrivi mxatvruli tradiciebi. saxasiaToa isic, rom am drois xelnawerebSi singuriT daferili ornamentuli samkaulebi scildeba CarCos sazRvrebs, erwymis inicials, teqstSi iWreba da masTan erTad erT mTlianobas avlens, xolo etratis spilosZvlisferi feris mniSvnelobiT

71

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

gamoyeneba im drois sakmaod gavrcelebuli meTodia. naSromis amocanaa warmoaCinos sxvadasxva mxatvruli skolebis ikonografiuli, stiluri da mxatvruli Taviseburebani, aCvenos qarTuli wignis xelovnebis evoluciuri ganviTarebis gza am saukuneebSi.

lali osefaSvili

SoTa rusTavelis saxelobis Teatrisa da kinos saxelmwifo universiteti. saqarTvelo qarTul liturgikul gragnilTa mxatvruli gaformebis Taviseburebani (XII-XVIss) xelnawerTa erovnul centrSi daculia liturgikuli gragnilebis garkveuli raodenoba, romelTaTvis Tvalis gadevneba gaformebis Taviseburebebis Sesaxeb daskvnebis gamotanis saSualebas iZleva. cnobilia, rom xelnaweri liturgikuli gragnilebi XI saukunis inovaciaa. am epoqis pirveli qarTuli xelnaweri gragnili mourTvelia. XII saukunidan (S-4980) ukve yalibdeba maTi morTulobis specifika. amjerad sxva kanonikuri xelnawerebis msgavsad gragnilsac gaaCnia Tavfurceli, anu I kefi, romelzec gamoisaxeba an simboluri xasiaTis konpozicia an avtoris portreti. magaliTad, Tu XII saukunis gragnilis Tavfurcelze gamosaxulia Zeli, anu sveti-cxoveli, XIII saukunis gragnilis (A-922) I kefze ki, wm. ioane oqropiria, viTarca avtori liturgiisa, xolo XVI saukunis gragnilze (H-516) aSkaraa, rom Tavfurclis miniatura garkveul varirebas ganicdis. aq gamosaxulia monumenturi jvari da liturgiis avtorebi-wm. basili didi da wm. ioane oqropiri anu gaerTianebulia golgoTas msxverpli da evqaristiuli msxverpli. XII saukunidan marginalur areebze ukve sazedao asoebia ganTavsebuli. SesaZlebelia maTi diferencireba: 1. martivi sazedao aso - singuriT moxazuli; 2. rTuli agebulebis sazedao aso-mcenareuli an zoomorfuli ornamentebiT Semkuli da 3. siuJeturi sazedao aso, romlis gaformebaSic gamosaxulebaa CarTuli. gragnilTa morTulobis es specifika, romelic XII saukunidan iRebs saTaves, XVI saukunemde met-naklebi sxvaobiT grZeldeba. moipoveba gragnilebi, romelnic mxolod sazedao asoebiT aris morTuli: H-521(XV s.); H-511(XVI s.) miuxedavad gragnilTa morTulobis specifikisa, mxatvari misdevs xelnawerTa morTulobis Camoyalibebul normebs, vTqvaT ise, rogorc uxvad ilustrirebul oTxTavebSia. magaliTad, sveticxovliseul gragnilze iq, sadac ziarebazea Txroba, teqsti horizontaluradaa gaWrili da sami zolisebri scenaa gamosaxuli-jer "qriste mociqulebiTurT" da "ziareba"jer sefiskveriT, Semdeg zedaSiT. Cven SegviZlia aseve qarTuli liturgikuli gragnilebi bizantiurs SevadaroT, rac kidev erTxel mowmobs, rom qarTuli kultura, erTi mxriv, isrutavs mowinave qveynis miRwevebs da, meore mxriv, myar erovnul tradiciebs qmnis. saamiso nimuSad SeiZleba movitanoT erTi magaliTi: aso Q-ons qarTveli mxatvari bizantielTa msgavsad medalionad ar iyenebs da masSi ar aTavsebs gamosaxulebas, qarTveli mxatvari mas wris ki ara ovalis formas aniWebs, qristes gamosaxulebas mis zemoT aTavsebs, viTarca dominants, romelic sufevs yovelsa zeda. amdenad, liturgikuli gragnilis morTuloba saukuneTa manZilze myar saxes iRebs: teqsti naweria erT svetad nusxuriT, gaaCnia Tavfurceli, marginalur areebze ki sazedao asoebi.

72

Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelo

izolda meliqiSvili

saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi. saqarTvelo qarTuli saeklesio samosis ferisa da formis simbolikis sakiTxisaTvis qarTuli mxatvruli qargulobis nimuSebi yvelaze mniSvnelovani saxiT saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumis S. amiranaSvilis saxelobis xelovnebis muzeumSia warmodgenili. es koleqcia or ZiriTad jgufadaa gayofili: saero da sasuliero daniSnulebis naqargoba, es ukanaskneli ki aerTianebs sasuliero pirTa da saeklesio msaxurebisTvis saWiro nivTebs da samoss. jer kidev Zveli aRTqmis mixedviT, samosi, romelic RmerTma "daumtkica" aaronsa da sxva mRvdelmTavarT, ganasaxierebda maT gamorCeulobas sxva adamianTagan. amave principidan gamomdinare, axali aRTqmis eklesiam Tavis msaxurTaTvis daawesa samosi, romlis warmomavlobas mociqulTa cxovrebis xanas ukavSireben. arsebobs mravali varaudi, Tu rogori formisa da feradovnebis iyo uZvelesi saRvTismsaxuro samosi, magram erTi ram yvela saxis literaturaSi (rogorc saeklesio, aseve samecniero) xazgasmiTaa aRniSnuli, rom uZvelesi samosi iyo TeTri - "angelozTa samosis feri". am samosis tarebis ufleba da masTan dakavSirebuli dogmatika gansazRvruli iyo da aris saeklesio krebebis dadgenilebebiT. aqedan gamomdinare dawesda saeklesio pirTa ierarqiis sami xarisxis samosi. aseve dadginda TiToeuli saeklesio xarisxis Sesabamis SesamoselTa raodenoba (diakoni imoseba sami, mRvdeli - xuTi da mRvdelmTavari Svidi saxis samosiT). simboluri TvalsazrisiT, saRvTismsaxuro es is samosia, romelsac macxovari atarebda miwieri cxovrebis, misi Sepyrobisa da gasamarTlebis dros. am samosis formisa da feris simbolika am konteqstSi unda iqnes ganxiluli. saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumis koleqciebSi daculi saRvTismsaxuro samosis Seswavlam garkveuli daskvnebis gamotanis saSualeba mogvca: 1. iseve rogorc mTel marTlmadidebel samyaroSi, qarTuli saeklesio samosis formebSic ori ZiriTadi arsi Zevs: jvari - macxovris miwieri da zeciuri cxovrebis aRmniSvneli simbolo da wre - misi maradiuli arsebobis, uwyvetobis, usasrulobisa da "simrTelis" niSani. 2. samosis simbolika emyareba wminda ricxvTa gamoyenebas. rac ukavSirdeba "orobis", "samebisa" da "Svidobis" arsis Cadebas saeklesio samosis formaTa gaazrebaSi. 3. feri, romelic aRmosavleT saqristianos xelovnebaSi yovelTvis asrulebda umniSvnelovanes rols, qarTul saeklesio samosSic mniSvnelovani simbolikiTaa datvirTuli; bizantiis ferTa kanonikaSi ukve VI saukuneSi Camoyalibda Svidi ZiriTadi feri da swored am ferTa struqturazea agebuli RvTismsaxurTa qarTuli Sesamoselis ferTa gamac. 4. feri da feradovneba qarTul saeklesio samosSi TviTmyofadobiTa da TaviseburebebiT - sisadaviT da ferTa TavSekavebuli gamiT gamoirCeva. feri simboluri gagebiT macxovrisa da wm. mamebis mier dadgenili samsaxuris maradiulobis, ubiwobisa da WeSmariti rwmenis gamoxatvis erT-erTi umniSvnelovanesi saSualebaa.

73

seqcia I I S E C T I ON

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

Villanova University. USA Ioane Zedazneli: A Georgian Saint in the Syrian Ascetical Tradition During the first half of the sixth century, the character of Georgian Christianity was profoundly influenced by the introduction of monasticism. This is attributed to the arrival of St.Ioane Zedazneli (John of Zedazeni) at the Iberian capital of Mtskheta with twelve of his monastic co-laborers, known collectively in the Georgian tradition as the Thirteen Syrian Fathers. St. John's disciples soon fanned out across Iberia, following his example of asceticism, miracle-working and evangelization. Some commentators have argued that the Syrian Fathers were, in fact, not Syrian at all, but Georgians who had come into contact with Syrian ascetics. Others have viewed them as Monophysite dissidents who fled as refugees from Chalcedonian persecution under Justin and Justinian. One profitable avenue of inquiry into the origins and character of these monks is to engage in a close analysis of the teachings and ascetic practices of St. Ioane Zedazneli, one of the best known of the Syrian Fathers. As a spiritual leader to the other Syrian Fathers, St. Ioane Zedazneli served as their most important model for the ascetic life, as well as the principal source for their teachings. This paper examines the early sources, which depict the life and teachings of St.Ioane Zedazneli. These works are then compared with representative sources from the early Syrian ascetical tradition to reveal the various links between the pioneers of sixth century Georgian monasticism and their purported Syrian roots. In addition, this paper will examine St. Ioane Zedazneli's place in the formation of Georgian historical memory, and the ways in which he has been commemorated in Georgian iconography and mural painting.

Christopher Haas

Alexei M. Lidov

Russian Academy of Fine Arts. Russia Eastern Christian "Image-Paradigms": A Hierotopic Dimension of Medieval Art History The paper deals with new approaches to the history of Eastern Christian art, which relate to the methodological aspects in studies of medieval Georgian art and culture. It, first of all, concerns the concept of hierotopy (the creation of sacred spaces), recently proposed by the author of this paper and elaborated in several publications by an international group of scholars. These studies have revealed an important theoretical issue. In many cases, the discussion of visual culture can not be reduced to a positivist description of artifacts, or to the analysis of theological notions. Some phenomena can be properly interpreted only on the level of image-ideas, I prefer to term them "image-paradigms", which do not coincide with the illustrative pictures or ideological conceptions. This special notion seems a useful instrumentum studiorum, which helps to explain a layer of phenomena. Image-paradigms were not connected with the illustration of any specific text, although they remained a part of a continuum of literary and symbolic meanings and associations. This type of imagery is quite distinct from what one may call an iconographic device. At the same time the image-paradigm belonged to visual culture, it was visible and recognizable, but it was not formalized in any fixed state, either in a form of the pictorial scheme or in a mental construction. In this respect, the image-paradigm looks similarly to the metaphor that loses its sense in re-telling, or in its de-construction into parts. It does not concern any mystic but a special type of consciousness, which determined several symbolic structures as well as numerous concrete pictorial motifs. In addition, it challenges our fundamental methodological approach to the image as illustration and flat picture. In the paper, I am going to discuss some particular Eastern Christian "image-paradigms", including very important Georgian examples.

75

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

Ekaterine Gedevanishvili, Marine Kenia

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection. Georgia The Correlation of the Word and Image in the Medieval Georgian Mural Painting Along with pictorial language, the idea of holy icons is primarily unveiled by inscriptions, which accompany such images. The issue surrounding the correlation of the "Word" and "Image" in the medieval art is continuously being addressed by different foreign scholars (B. Schellewald, L. Brubacker, G. McGuer, R. Nelson and others). In Georgian scholarship, in addition to analyzing iconography special attention has been paid to the accompanying explanatory inscriptions of several scenes, as well as to the inscriptions on the prophet scrolls and triumphal arches, which help to uncover the coalesced theological idea emphasized by the paintings (T. Virsaladze, A. Volskaia, E. Privalova, I. Lortkifanidze, A. Okropiridze, M Didebulidze, Z. Skhirtladze and others). The material of these studies by Georgian scholars and the results of the recent research give rise to the possibility of making certain classification. According to preliminary conclusions, findings are likely to determine the following "functional" groups: · Simple, laconic explanatory inscriptions, unveiling the subject or identity of the image ­ this is the most common type, which, on one hand, makes the image recognizable and, on the other, indicates the mystical connection with the prototype. · Widespread, narrative explanatory inscriptions, which not only specify the essence of the image, but also enrich the image with additional details. Among these are so-called "memorial" inscriptions (i.e. the explanations of martyrdom scenes), which give the narrative extension to the meaning of the image and rare inscriptions, which we can refer to as "Psychological" ones, which in with their pictorial form grip the spectator as a participant of the event. · Inscriptions that emphasize the key highlights of the theological program. To this type belong accompanying inscriptions of separate images, as well as the liturgical texts included in the ensembles (the scroll texts of prophets and St. Fathers, the inscription of triumphal arches) ­ these inscriptions help to explore the dogmatic-symbolic meaning of the painting. The chronological constraints of the use of these inscriptions are profound and the rules for their application are quite diverse: whereas in some cases we have just one "functional" type of the inscriptions, in other, contemporary cases we observe the simultaneous use of different "functional" groups.

Ori Soltes

Georgetown University. USA The Art of "The Knight" in its Contexts The Knight in the Panther's Skin is typically referred to as Georgia's national epic poem. This paper will consider three interwoven issues. The first is how the poem is an epic that fits well into the history of the Western epic tradition that extends in time and space from the ancient Middle East and the Epic of Gilgamesh to the Renaissance in Italy and Tasso's Jerusalem Delivered, in terms of content and in terms of style. What are the elements-the imagery, rhythmic patterns, heroic goals, interweave of issues of love and strife, role of divinity-that define an epic and how does the Georgian poem exhibit those elements? The second issue is how the poem is uniquely Georgian, reflecting the values and sensibilities of Georgian culture. What is the nature of the hero - culturally and religiously - and what does he and the questions raised by his adventure reflect of the socio-religiously diverse world in which the poem was created? Put otherwise: how does The Knight in the Panther's Skin reflect the nature of Georgia as a realm of tolerant synthesis, a place of meeting among diverse cultures and traditions? These two issues will form the basis for the third, which is to consider the visual imagery that has attached itself to the epic - the illuminations and illustrations that, given the first two issues addressed in this paper, might be expected to offer a synthesis of diversely influenced and indigenous elements. How does the imagery that connects to the epic

76

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

from the 15th-18th c compare with imagery in the Persian, Turkish and European worlds of that era? What sort of imagery within these other traditions is specifically comparable to the imagery of the Knight in the Panther's Skin and why?

Mariam Didebulidze

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection. Georgia Secular Tendencies in the Culture of Queen Tamar's Epoch and its Contemporaneous Mural Painting It is widely recognized that the Queen Tamar's epoch is marked by the noticeable rise of a secular spirit, as most clearly reflected in the famous "Knight in the Panther's Skin" by Shota Rustaveli. This has given scholars the right to argue that idea of a Western Renaissance existed in Georgia. The same kinds of tendencies are also observed in other parts of Byzantine world, especially in Constantinople and its close associates. However, it is still difficult to find artistic trends of the Renaissance from a Western European perspective in Georgian fine art from the period. Indeed, judging by the mural paintings of Queen Tamar's epoch, especially by the content of their programs, which demonstrate the triumph of Orthodoxy and the idea of rejection against heresies, and also by the fact that they adorn the isolated abbeys and the churches of ascetic monasteries, the sensual, physical and mundane is hardly noticeable. It is only possible to cite the acute sensation of individual and personal, which points to the aspiration to a more deep mystical union with God. Such artworks demonstrate the interesting aspect of human psychology during Queen Tamar's epoch, which on one hand was somehow dual and ambivalent, aspiring to reach a mystical union with god; while on the other, it perceived the earthly world. However, "this world" in ecclesiastic art is analyzed particularly as the creation of God, beautified by his divine blessing.

Pavlos Flourentzos

Department of Antiquities. Cyprus The Byzantine Mosaics and Wall Painting of Churches in Cyprus The spread of Christianity in Cyprus was accompanied by the construction of numerous churches richly decorated with floor and mural mosaics. The sixth century wall mosaics of Panagia Kanakaria and Panagia Angeloktistos are both unique examples of mosaics found in apses that depict the Virgin Mary. After a long period of decline following the Arab raids, Byzantine rule was reestablished on the island, once again promoting art that emanated directly from Constantinople. During the 11th and 12th centuries, Cyprus entered a new era of prosperity as is witnessed by the number of churches and monasteries built all over the island. Wall paintings such as those of Panagia Phorviotissa, Panagia tou Arakos, Ayios Nikolaos tis Stegis, and Ayios Ioannis Lampadistis display strong links between contemporary Comnenian art as it was evolving in Constantinople. The Frankish kingdom, established in Cyprus in 1192, lasted three centuries and introduced the island to a western type of feudal system. Many of the wall paintings of this period found at Panagia Phorviotissa, Ayios Nikolaos tis Stegis, Panagia (Moutoulas), and the Holy Cross depict donors dressed in western style. During Venetian rule (1472-571), the wall paintings of Archangel Michael and of the Holy Cross Agiasmati reflect the Paleologian style developed in Constantinople; elements of the so-called "Crusader"

77

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

style of painting, which was developed mainly in Palestine by western artists; and the local tradition of Byzantine painting. Finally, after Venetian occupation ended, wall paintings developed in two distinct directions. The wall paintings of the church of Panagia Podithou follow the Italo-Byzantine school of Cyprus, which combine classical Byzantine elements with those of the Italian Renaissance. On the other hand the wall paintings of the church of the Transfiguration of our Saviour reflect the Palaeologian revival in a personal character.

Aleksandra Davidov Temerinski

Institute for the Protection of Cultural Monuments. Serbia Eschatology, Ideology, Contextualisation: The Last Judgment in Decani, Akhtala and Timotesubani The unique and grandiose cycle of the Last Judgment that decorates the western part of the naos of the Pantokrator Church, the katolikon of the monastery Decani in Serbia (app. 1345), finds its closest parallels in some earlier Georgian churches: Akhtala (1205-1216) and Timotesubani (1205-1215). In this paper I will try to explain this phenomenon. Given the vast geographical distance between Serbia and Georgia and the fact that political, trading or cultural liaisons between these two medieval states did not exist, it is clear that any kind of artistic "exchange" should have been excluded. The similarity of the Last Judgement images in Decani, Akhtala and Timothesubani could be explained as a consequence of the similar ideological context in Serbia and Georgia at the time when these churches were painted. In none of these three compositions is the didactic or moral message emphasized, although, generally speaking, that was the most recognizable Last Judgement feature in the last period of Byzantine art. On the contrary, in both Serbian and Georgian monuments, the most prominent aspect of the scene is the dogmatic sense of the true, orthodox faith. The second aim of this paper will be an appeal for reconsidering our knowledge of the Last Judgement image in Byzantine art and culture. Considering that the compositions were represented in the western parts of the churches that had most often been ruined or rebuilt, the development and standardisation of the monumental Last Judgement scenes still represents, at least partly, the terrain of a terra incognita. Our certainty in establishing its "typical characteristics" still poses various questions which we have yet to answer with more caution.

Ida Sinkevic

Lafayette College. USA Fresco Icons in Monumental Art of Georgia and Byzantium: Meaning and Significance Painted icons, also referred to as fresco icons or even fictive icons, are found in the monumental art of both Byzantium and the countries within the orbit of its influence. Known since at least the eleventh century, these painted images of panel icons are either circular or rectangular in shape, displaying holy figures within realistic frames often topped with a painted hook to imitate the appearance of the actual hanging icons. In addition to Georgian monuments, we also see fresco icons in the Church of St. Sophia in Ohrid; the Ossuary of Backovo Monastery; the Monastery of St. Cyril in Kiev; Djurdjevi Stupovi; Nerezi; and the churches of Mystra. While paucity of evidence precludes the knowledge of their sources, the wide geographic range of places where they appear, from Macedonia and Serbia, to Russia and Georgia, may suggest the Byzantine capital, Constantinople, as a tentative but possible place of their origin. The appearance of fictive icons in Kalenderhane Camii supports this claim. The presence of fictive icons in church decoration has been most commonly explained as an attempt to

78

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

define the place of action and emphasize its sacred character. While this is generally true of fresco-icons in Georgian churches too as the examples prove, those at Bertubani, Betania and Q'inc'visi, suggest additional meaning and significance of these icons. It is the purpose of this paper to examine fresco-icons in Georgian churches and assess their importance in understanding the multiplicity of cross-cultural roles that these icons held in medieval art and culture.

Irine Mamaiashvili

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection. Georgia Post Byzantine Tendencies in 16th c. Georgian Mural Painting Sixteenth century Georgian mural paintings are marked with a variety of different tendencies. At the end of 15th, beginning of 16th centuries, during a period of political and social turmoil when the number of professional painters was reduced, a so-called "Folk paintings" became dominant in murals painting. Like Georgia, other countries of the Orthodox world did not experience a period of intense creative activity during the time. The realm between "Folk paintings" and professional painting in Georgia is occupied by the murals of the Church of the Virgin at Gelati, executed in the 1520s. On one hand, features of Palaeologan style (figure proportions, face types, and the use of clothing drapery and color contrasts) are obvious; and on the other hand, some features coincide more with typical characteristics of "Folk paintings" pictorial elements (the evident non-tectonic nature of compositions, simplicity of drawing, ornamental-decorative embellishment of form, and the naive expressiveness). The tendency toward the simplification, which is peculiar to these paintings, is generally common to the early stage of development of Post-Byzantine art. The influence of mainstream Byzantine art, and namely of the schools of Crete and Mount of Athos, is clearly demonstrated by paintings donated by Levan, King of Kakheti (1520-1574); Bagrat III - King of Imereti (1510-1565); and his son George II (1565-1583). Such paintings can be found at Alvani, Gremi, Nekresi, Akhali Shuamta, Church of the Virgin and St. George at Gelati. The iconographic programs get more complex as they are enriched with new, previously unknown iconographic themes for Georgia. However, Georgian examples, unlike the paintings of other Orthodox countries, are less "overfilled" with extended cycles and different Saints' images. The depiction of Saints, which were especially venerated in Georgia, the peculiarities of donor portraits, as well as a number of features of painting style, such as a trend toward the clarity of structure, laconic compositions, and less variegated palette, can be ascribed to local traditions. Thus the 16th century Georgian painting evolved within the mainstream of Post-Byzantine art, though at a certain extent it retained its ties to local traditions.

Beatrice Tolidjian

Columbia University, USA Georgian Inspiration for External Wall Decoration of Gregorios Pakourianos Foundations Around Plovdiv. Bulgaria In 1084, Gregorios Pakourianos, the grand Domesticos of the West during the reign of Alexios I Comnenos founded a monastery dedicated to the Theotokos at Petrizos, (Bachkovo Monastery) near the village of Stanimacos, present day Asenovgrad, Bulgaria. Of the building campaigns of Pakourianos, the foundations of interest for the present study are the Bachkovo Monastery ossuary and the Church St. George "Metoshki." They both would have been built between 1083 and 1086. This study in gestation focuses on the manner of the decorative treatment of the facades in each of the two cases. One observes features never

79

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

before seen on Bulgarian lands as pertaining to the external decorative scheme of medieval churches. A feature shared by both the ossuary and Metoshki consists of a twice recessed blind arcade. Its main unit consists of a pilaster, to the center of which is attached a semi-column.These engaged columns with semicylindrical profiles rise to form arches in a continuous manner, i.e. uninterrupted by capitals. The columns and the arches become part of the same continuous organism projecting the exact same semi-cylindrical profile. This decorative program is well-known in the Caucasus, where it has been used extensively, mainly for embellishing parts of the exterior of ecclesiastical buildings, while very occasionally it has been used in the interior as well. Scholarship has traditionally pointed to Armenian precedents for this type of church facade decoration. This author, however, puts forth in this study, an even earlier Georgian example, namely from 864. Other Georgian examples exist from the 10th and the early part of the 11th century. This study proposes to make a comparative analysis with respect to style and function of the external facade decoration of the two Pakourianos foundations in Bulgaria and the Georgian buildings with the intent of showing that this artistic idiom has been borrowed from the medieval buildings of the Caucasus, with the earliest extant exponent coming from Georgia. This notion of the importation of artistic ideas from the Caucasian program of facade decoration will be examined in light of the close politico-socio-religious ties that existed between Georgia of the third quarter of the 11th century and the Georgian community of monks in this region of Bulgaria, and most importantly in light of the founder's own intimate ties with the lands of the Caucasus.

Tamar Khundadze

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection. Georgia The Images of Historical Figures in Medieval (6th -11thc) Georgian Facade Sculpture The images of historical figures form an important part of Christian medieval art. The earliest examples of these images in Georgia are preserved on stone carvings. The facades of Georgian churches often bear the images of donors, such as governors and clergy, as well as of architects and masters. The exact place for these images on the exterior was not strictly determined ­ we see them on the lower part of the building, above the doors and windows, and even on the dome. The stone carved images of historical persons became the focus of Georgian scholarship from the very beginning of this area of study. Significant research by G. Chubinashvili, R. Schmerrling, L. Rcheulishvili, N. Chubinashvili, G. Alibegashvili, N. Aladashvili, A. Volskaia, K. Machabeli is dedicated to analysis of the style and historical information provided by these images. Juxtaposing carvings' accompanying inscriptions with historical sources helped to identify the historical figures depicted. In the past twenty years, studies by N. Aladashvili, L. Khuskivadze, D. Khoshtaria, I. Nikoleishvili, G. Gagoshidze, I. Giviashvili, T. Khundadze, among others, mainly focused on the thematic and symbolic context of donor compositions. The central idea of these images is the plea for the salvage of human soles and for divine protection. In terms of this general idea, there are some thematic variations that result in a diversity of composition and schemes: We have the images of historical persons approaching the Savior, the Virgin, the Saints, and the Angels with the gesture of prayer; the separate praying, Orant figures; and the donors with church models in their hands before the Savior, the Virgin, the Saints or Prophets. Furthermore, images of historical figures with church models are included in scenes of The Last Judgment. In addition, we have some examples of historical figures flanking the cross, which reflects the longlasting local tradition of cross veneration. Some unique compositions include donors facing the plan of the church, the consecration of church, liturgical procession, historical figures riding horses, among others. Diversity of thematic and compositional interpretation is also present in the images of architects and

80

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

masters: Sometimes they are depicted with the gesture of prayer, sometimes with their working tools or even during the working process. The medieval Georgian donor reliefs also vary in terms of a style, reflecting the artistic and aesthetical taste and features of different historical epochs, as well as the peculiarities of various regions of the country.

Ekaterine Kvachatadze

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection. Georgia The Main Trends of the Medieval Georgian Facade Sculpture After 11th century The end of 11th century marks a period of crises in Georgian sculpture, and as a consequence, the history of sculpture after this time remained beyond the focus of scholars. Though it is still difficult to analyze comprehensively the development and problematic nature of the sculpture of these centuries, there are some hypotheses we can put forward. During the 12th-16th century, scenes and images emphasizing integral ideas are not found on the exteriors of Georgian churches at any further extent. Due to political turmoil, the creative process was interrupted and some examples became dilapidated (especially from the 14th -16th century). On the facades of the surviving churches from this period (Pitareti, Kazreti, Ertatsmnida, Tsugrugasheni, Dmanisi Sioni, Magalaant Eklesia, Sapara, Sadgeri, Chitakhevi Belfry, etc.), we can observe separate and unrelated stone carved compositions. These miniature facade reliefs, often interwoven with the ornamental decor, display different qualities of craftsmanship and are close stylistically to miniature sculpture. This diminishes their monumentality, which generally characterizes facade decoration. Despite their overall decorative nature, these sculptural reliefs, which often bear deep symbolic and theological meaning, highlight the most important parts of the building. In the following period of Late Middle Ages (17th - 18th century), we witness an attempt to create a system of facade decoration. At Ananuri Church, the long abandoned tradition of creating an integral artistic program of facade decoration to express one idea and a complex theological meaning is rediscovered. This is followed by a system of facade decoration at St. Peter and Paul Church in Sagarejo and "Gigos Sakdari" in Kintsvisi, which stands close to Ananuri. The "Mtskheta" church in Lechkhumi is somewhat distinguished. The artistic interest in volumetric forms, which had waned after 11th century, is not a driving force, even for the revitalized creative explorations of 17th-18th century. The main intention of such artistic explorations was the creation and revival of the sculptural programs incorporated to express one theological idea. Beneath the arms of crosses marked with the triumphal-eschatological features evolved the main idea for the decoration program that reflected Old and New Testament images. The artistic style of late medieval relief sculptures is as polysemantic and dissimilar, as in some cases, non-typical and difficult to interpret iconography of this period.

Peter Grossmann

German Institute of Archaeology in Cairo. Germany Roman and Late Roman Elements in the Early Christian Architecture of Egypt in Comparison with the Situation in Georgia Since the time of Augustus Egypt belongs to the Roman Empire and since the 4th century or even before the Egyptians abandoned their great Pharaonic tradition and used for the architectural arrangement of their surroundings motives from the Hellenistic and Roman art. The style of their architecture became Roman

81

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

with a few minor exceptions based on longer lasting traditions. The basilica, common type of early church architecture all over the world, keeps in Egypt its pre-Christian shape. All centralized churches in Egypt follow foreign models and the architectural decoration is heavily influenced from the development in C/pel, the capital of the Late Roman Empire. With Georgia the situation is completely different. It was never as long part of the Roman Empire. The Georgian ecclesiastical architecture is indeed rather different from the influence of the Late Roman Empire. Examples which used the style of the basilica are rare and it seems that a centralized building type came in Georgia earlier into use than in other parts of the Empire. Apart of this the Georgian churches are nearly all built of stone material and the decorative elements are typical Georgian. Only in rare cases one can observe traces of later Roman influences

John Wilkinson

The British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem. (Retired Director) UK Where did Georgia's Churches Start? I was lucky enough in 1995 to meet Professor Vachtang Beridze. Over 13 years I have benefited greatly by reading his book on ancient churches. I do not know whether he would have agreed with what I am going to say about their origin, but he would certainly have given it a fair hearing. It used to be the case that the design of churches was supposed to come from the basilica. But this was because so much nineteenth century scholarship was based in Rome. Roman influence was everywhere because Rome was the first to publish art books which, by any standard, were excellent. And Roman scholars were very impressed by the author of a book on architecture, Leon Battista Alberti, who was also an inhabitant of the Vatican. Alberti published his book in 1485, and this was the first time that his theory about the basilica as the origin of church design was printed. Is this theory of the basilica leading to the church correct? In Georgia, you only have to look at the position of the altar on the plan. It is not exactly the same in every church. But the thing which links all these altars is the proportion, the proportion of the Ark in the Tabernacle or in the Jerusalem Temple. So, in my personal opinion, the churches were originally based on some buildings with a close link to the Tabernacle or the Temple, and these are the Jewish synagogues.

Irine Giviashvili

Freelance Scholar. Georgia Georgian Polyapsidal Church Architecture The aim of my work is to bring together and analyze the developments of the type of medieval church known as Polyapsidal. A polyapsidal church has more than one apse. In these churches a semicircular wall covered with a conch can be found not only the east part of the sanctuary, but also on the lateral, north and south sides, and on the west too. These buildings are reffered to as triconches, tetraconces, five-apsed and hexaconces. Such Polyapsidal buildings will be discussed in comparison with six arm and eight arm buildings. The remains of these kind of buildings are preserved in Georgia, as well in historic Georgian provinces of Tao-Klarjeti (Turkey) and Hereti (Azerbaijan). The evaluation of the tetraconch church type in Georgia was published by Prof. G. Chubinashvili, founder of the School of Art History studies in Georgia. His work Monuments of the Jvari type, Tbilisi 1948, remains not only as the main publication of this type of church building in Georgia but also as the key study of Medieval Georgian Architecture in general. Numerous publications by other scholars were dedicated to

82

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

the different Polyapsidal churches of Georgia, as well as on the rendering these types. According the preliminary research the appearance of this type of architecture in Georgia is connected to contemporary stylistical movements. The aesthetics of the so called "classical" period contributed to the popularity of tetraconches. By contrast, the period of building hexaconces and eight armed churches corresponds a period known as the "transitional period", time when architects are in search to achieve new scale and new style. The Building time of triconches corresponds to the new needs of 0-11th centuries and becomes a major type of cathedral architecture.Order to classify Polyapsidal churches it is important to take into consideration the liturgical needs that contributed to the development of the forms and sizes of these types. In this regard it is important to discuss the structure of Bana Cathedral and compare this example with the other buildings of the same type.- the tetraconch in rotunda. Georgian Polyapsidal church architecture must be discussed in relationship to similar buildings found in neighboring regions of the Christian East and in roman and pre-Christian architecture. Medieval Georgian church architecture represents a typological diversity which is similar to that of church architecture in the Eastern Christian world.

Ketevan Abashidze

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection. Georgia Stone Facing in Georgian Ecclesiastic Architecture Georgia's land resembles that of other small European counties. Its relief is marked by diversity, as on this relatively small territory one will come across almost every type of natural landscape. The nature, climate and flora in Georgia are varied as well. So too are its stones: one can find multicolored and differently drawn solid marble; mirror-like teshenites; gold tuffs; green albitophire; dark gray basalt; gray and lilac-colored andesite; different colored limestone and sandstones; travertine and shale. Diversity in stone types points to the geological ancientness of Georgia. Likewise, the roots of building traditions in Georgia date back to the hoary past. The paper focuses on the façade stone cladding of Georgian ecclesiastic architecture. It explores the characteristics of the façade stone facing of both ecclesiastic and secular buildings, from ancient times through the period of Christian church building and beyond. The paper analyses the peculiar feature of Georgian churches, artistically executed masonry such as on "the robe" (in Georgian) of the building. Such craftsmanship bears the traces of a special creative impulse. A church "robe" that was made of stones draws upon the ancient local building traditions. The stone's color and placement plays an important role in creating the entire image of the church. Furthermore, together with carved ornamentation, it is one of the most important elements of church facade embellishment, because it simultaneously bears the constructive-seismic, artistic-aesthetic and symbolic meaning.

David Khoshtaria

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection. Georgia Architecture of Tao-Klarjeti: History and Perspectives of Study Archaeological interest in the antiquities of Tao-Klarjeti started in the nineteenth century (K. Koch, D. Bakradze, G. Kazbegi, Pr. Uvarova). From the architectural point of view, they were explored by A. Pavlinov, N. Marr, and E. Taqaishvili who visited many churches, monasteries, and fortresses in the region and published valuable materials including descriptions, photographs, and drawings. After the First World War, the study of the architecture of Tao-Klarjeti was interrupted and was resumed

83

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

after a long time owing to N. and J.-M. Thierry,V. Djobadze, R. Edwards, and B. Baumgartner. From 1980s, M. Kadirolu and other Turkish scholars are also actively engaged in the inventory and study of the monuments of Tao-Klarjeti. By the 1980s, the architecture of Tao-Klarjeti was already determined as a priority aspect of research by Georgian scholars. However, political obstacles prevented them from exploring the antiquities of "Turkish Georgia" in situ. As early as 1930s, G. Chubinashvili argued the exceptional role of Tao-Klarjeti in the development of the Georgian architecture. Subsequently V. Beridze fully revealed this role in his general work. Only after the collapse of the Soviet regime, Georgian scholars managed to arrange expeditions in Turkey. In the recent years, new perspectives emerge in the study of the architecture of Tao-Klarjeti. A joint Turkish-Georgian team (O. Aytekin, I. Elizbarashvili) was formed for the inventory of Georgian monuments in Turkey. Due to the efforts of M. Bogisch, there is a revival of the interest in Tao-Klarjeti in the Western scholarship, which resulted in a special panel at the XXI International Congress of Byzantine Studies in London 2006. Actually, it was the first gathering of scholars studying the subject from different countries. Workshop in Istanbul 2007 was an important further step in this direction. It gave an incentive to the creation of the international multidisciplinary team (F. Bayram, D. Khoshtaria, I. Giviashvili, A. Peacock), which plans to start investigations in Tao in Summer 2008.

University of Vienna. Austria

Dr. Bruno Baumgartner

Unknown and Less Known Georgian Monuments in Northeast Turkey The exploration of Tao-Klarjeti, or better of Zemo Kartli (Upper Kartli) how the Georgians have called the provinces situated in the valley of the river Çhorkhi and in the upper reaches of the river Kura (Mtkvari) was dominated by its difficult position in the region between Turkey and Russia. My own researches in Tao-Klarjrti began with a touristical journey to Eastern Anatolia in 1982 when I visited the first time some important monuments of Tao-Klarjeti as Oshki, Ishkhani, Xaxuli, Doliskana and Yeni Rabat. During the following years I undertook with a car of my own four journeys to Tao-Klarjeti In 1985, 1986, 1988 and 1990 I could travel to nearly all places cited by Zdanevich. Assisted by the aid of modern street maps and the Map of the Turkish Army (Harta Genel Müdürlüü) I was able not only to locate nearly all Georgian monuments but also to measure and photograph most of them. In 1989 at the International Symposium of Georgian Art History in Tbilisi I reported about my researches in Klarjeti. During the following years I published some articles in Austria and France and in 1997 I finished at the University of Vienna my dissertation Studies on the historical geography of Tao-Klarjeti, where you can find new descriptions and photos of nearly all churches, monasteries and fortresses in Tao-Klarjeti. First I want to describe some churches in the upper region of the Kura/Mtkvari valley, the former Georgian provinces Kola, Artaani and Javaxeti. The greatest part of them was not visited by modern scholars since the days of Takaishvili at the beginning of the 20th century: Cicor, Dörtkilise, Alagöz, Eskibeyrehatun, Ölçek, Erueti, Börk, Sikirib and Gogubani. Another interesting group of nearly unknown churches and monasteries is situated in the valley of the Bardiz river, an important collateral valley of the Oltu-Penek river. Here we can find : Leksori, Kalkus, Ortulis Vanki, Bardiz, Kop, Kotris and Bobisgeri.

84

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

Markus Bogisch

University of Copenhagen. Denmark Some Remarks on Georgian Art History and the Cross-in-square Core of the Church in Oshki in the Historic Province of Tao (Northeast Turkey) The main church of the monastery in Oshki (963-973) has a core which is divided into nine bays by the four free-standing piers that support the dome. In essence, this is a cross-in-square structure, albeit on a monumental scale. Churches of this building type became predominant all over the Byzantine Empire from the ninth century onwards. The origin of the building type, however, remains still disputed. Various modes of explanation have been employed in the past, ranging from evolutionary and socio-economical theories to phenomenological interpretations. The intention of this paper is not that much to focus on the formal and typological similarities between the core structure of Oshki and the Middle Byzantine cross-in-square churches of Constantinople, but also to analyse it within the framework of the sacred architecture of the Christian East. Considering the traditionally close relations between Georgia and the Holy Land, I want to show that there are certain formal, conceptual and ideological traits that ultimately link Oshki to the architecture of Jerusalem.

Nato Gengiuri

Shota Rustaveli Theatre and Cinema University Georgia. Georgia Porches of Georgian Churches (From Early Christian Period to Advanced Middle Ages) The artistic-architectural decoration of church porches proves that the entrance to a church was a focus of Georgian architecture throughout all stages of its development. The importance of the entrance, which is highlighted by its artistic embellishment, is a feature common to Christian architecture in general. Central to it is the symbolic interpretation of both the entire ecclesiastic building as well as its separate parts. This idea is emphasized by western European medieval architecture and its contemporaneous texts, in which ecclesiastic buildings are interpreted in two ways: in terms of verbal description of ideal architectural space and its allegorical understanding. This unveils the double meaning of ecclesiastic architecture which is also present at entrances. Considered a symbolic border between the two worlds, the entrance acquires the meaning of a meeting point. Hence its location, conjunction with the church's main body and its orientation to the different sides of the world (East, West, North, and South) take on the special importance. These issues should be addressed also in terms of Georgian ecclesiastic architecture. Construction of the entry porches, as separate architectural volumes, was compulsory in almost every important monument in Georgia. Certain types of porches, such as the arched construction supported by four free standing pillars and open in three directions, are common to every stage of architectural development. But at the same time, the existence of other forms of porches is also observable. In addition, the means by which the importance of the porch is emphasized varies according to the development of different architectural styles. Because different stages of architectural development mark changes in porch varieties, certain porch types are more common to certain periods. In early Christian epoch, the entrance was highlighted through the arched pillared construction. In the fifth through seventh centuries the entrance, which was not separated from the main body of the church, is in "one flow" with the structure's detour, as can be seen in Bolnisi Sioni, Kvemo Bolnisi, Kandamiani, Vazisubani, Oltisi, and Tabakini, among elsewhere.

85

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

During the transitional period, there was a tendency both to maintain already established patterns and to explore the new three-parted porch style. The eighth and ninth century monuments, such as the churches of Ambara, Tskhvarichamia, Dvani, and Vachnadziani, display a variety in porch types. The widespread threeparted and richly stone carved porch type, which is typical to the advanced Middle Ages, was formed as a result of these artistic explorations. They have central parts with double-pitched pediment ended roofs and sides with lower single-pitched roofs. This type of the porch spreads in popularity from the 11th century on and is observable in church structures with and without domes (Zemo Krikhi, Magalaant Eklesia, Manglisi, Betania, and Kvatakhevi, etc.).

Irma Berdzenishvili

Archaeological Research Center of National Museum of Georgia. Georgia The Ecclesiastic Architecture of Abkhazeti in Early Middle Ages The ecclesiastic architecture of early Middle Ages in Abkhazeti is mainly known from unearthed architectural monuments. The spread of Christianity in this area was partly due to the fact that this region served as an asylum to first Christians persecuted by the Roman Empire. Today we know of about 26 fourth to eighth century architectural monuments discovered on the territory of Abkhazeti. Among these, the earliest and most valuable site is Bichvinta (Pitiunt), where the existence of a strong, organized Christian community, which dates to the late third century, can be observed. This is also proven by archeological finds. In fourth to sixth century, nine Christian churches were built on the territory of Bichvinta and its surroundings. From the sixth century onward, intensive ecclesiastic building activities spread throughout all Abkhazeti, including its costal area (Gantiadi, Gagra, Anakopia, Miusera, Sokhumi, Ochamchire, and Gudava), inland and mountainous regions ( Khashupse, Likhne, Dranda, Jgerda, Tsebelda, Shapka, and Mramba). Examples of Christian relief sculpture discovered in Mramba, Tsebelda, Anakophia, Sokhumi, Kulamba, and Dranda, are linked with these progressing building activity. Early Christian ecclesiastic architecture in Abkhazeti is manly represented by basilica-type churches: two- (Bichvinta) and three-aisled basilicas (Bichvinta #2 and #3 churches, Alahadze, Gantiadi, Sokhumi churches), and by triple-church basilicas (Gagra, Miusera, Abaanta abd Kiach-aba Churches). Along with basilica structures are some single-nave churches (Bichvinta, Anakopia, Gienosi, Tsebelda #2 and #3 churches, Mramba, Shapka and Kashupse), free standing baptisteries (Gudava) and a cross-domed church (Dranda). The early Christian ecclesiastic architecture of Abkhazeti bears evidence of traces of the synthesis between eastern and western building traditions. On one hand, the building techniques used link the monuments of Abkhazeti with those of Constantinople and the costal area of Asia Minor; and on the other, some features relate to the monuments of the inland regions of Asia Minor. Due to the current political situation, further investigation into the monuments of Abkhazeti became difficult. However a team of Russian-Abkhazian archeologists have been studying in the area for the last five years and has discovered many previously unknown archeological sites. Though we regret the fact that the abovementioned investigations have occurred without the participation Georgian scholars, it is clear that such recent discoveries have shed light on many vague issues as well as raised many new and interesting questions concerning the study of the antiquities in this region.

86

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

Edith Neubauer

University of Leipzig. Germany Georgian Medieval Architecture and Sculpture and the Central European Romanesque Period Georgia had adopted Christianity as a state religion as early as 337 AD. The pagan idols disappeared and at the same places Christian churches for worship and baptism were often been erected, a phenomenon known as "Continuity of the place of cult." There were no examples of Christian churches to follow. In the time between the fourth and the seventh centuries the inventive mind of Georgian architects created numerous manifold forms of basilicas and domed cruciform churches. The domed centralized church (Mtskheta, Jvari church 586/87 ­ 604/05) and the domed cruciform church with four freestanding pillars (Tsromi, Redeemer church 626 -34) became new variations, unique in the eastern Christian world. Georgia manifested its political and cultural independence of Byzantium with these remarkable achievements. A distinguishing feature of early Christian architectures is the use of relief sculpture which was already included in basilicas from the fourth century, but initially without a fixed concept. In the Jvari church and the Redeemer church no part of the building was ever adorned by pure chance, rather a fixed ideological programme existed. This promising development was interrupted by a 200-year of Arabic rule. The beginning of the tenth century was the renaissance of Christian church architecture and at the same time the renaissance of the monumental relief sculpture. A second significant use of relief sculpture are the tympana which are linked with the portal of a church. In the early Christian countries sculptured tympana in connection with church architecture can only be found in Armenia and Georgia. The comparison of Georgian and Romanesque German jambs, frames and pictorial programmes shows an astonishing similarity. Reception or parallel solution? Up to date the development of the monumental style of relief sculpture linked with fades of churches has not yet been given any regard. The first appearance about 600 AD (Jvari church, east façade) was a pioneering event. The multitude of its roots - Antiquity, Urartu art, and oriental art ­ have not been examined sufficiently. In Georgia and Armenia the mature style of monumental relief sculpture appeared in the early tenth century in Achtamar and Oshki. The impetus reached Byzantium, Old Russia, Germany and France.

Veronica Kalas Yavuz Özkaya

Wayne State University. USA Architectural Restoration PROMET. Turkey The Georgian Aspects of Medieval Architecture at Ani in the Thirteenth Century: The Church of Tigran Honents and the Mosque of Minuchir The Church of Tigran Honents and the Mosque of Minuchir at Ani stand among the most important buildings of the abandoned medieval Byzantine, Armenian, Georgian, and Seljuk city of Ani in northeastern Turkey. In a campaign to salvage major monuments in eastern Turkey that have been neglected for decades and to bring attention to underdeveloped regions of the country, Turkey's Ministry of Culture and Tourism offered a special commission for the preservation of these two structures. During the spring and summer of 2006, Tigran Honents and the so-called mosque were the object of intensive survey by the architectural firm PROMET based in Ankara. In this paper, we present some of the highlights from this study, including the most important drawings and three-dimensional models produced from the survey. We also discuss

87

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

the ways in which this significant work of primary documentation may lead toward a better understanding of medieval architectural history in the region, especially during the thirteenth century. These buildings testify to a complex period of cultural interactions in eastern Anatolia and the southern Caucasus during the thirteenth century. We will focus on the Georgian aspects of these two buildings, and explore the problems of building chronology, technology and style, as well as issues of identity, function and meaning.

Rosemary Basic

The University of Oklahoma. USA Georgia and Croatia: A Case of Common Source This paper explores some striking stylistic elements shared by a famous eleventh-century icon of Our Lady of Tenderness from the Church of SS Cyricus and Julitta in Lagurka, Svanetia, and thirteen-century example of the Virgin Mary with Child from the Church of Virgin Mary from Spalato (Split) in Croatia. Despite the fact that both paintings officially belong to different geographical and religious traditions, they share traces of formative style that was originated and perhaps transmitted by masters who appropriated an eclectic and rather unique manner of expression recognized in these two works. It is my intention to trace the background of these two examples and offer possible answers on the following questions: where and when this style was formatted? It is a known fact that from tenth century on, the Georgian masters were turning away from Judeo-Palestinian models replacing them with the tradition of the Church in Constantinople. At the time, the Byzantine capital was famous for iconographers who created numerous innovative styles that were transmitted with model-books to various parts of the Empire. The cultural origin of these masters, like in Croatian case, was most likely Italian, enhanced the "originality" of appropriated style and transformed it in what is known as the maniera latina work. On the other hand, the Georgian example reveals the mixture of both, genuine Byzantine and maniera latina elements. The possible source of both versions of this mode of expression was the Monastery of St. Catherine, a Greek stronghold at the Sinai desert in Egypt, where numerous artistic workshops were engaged in creating, transmitting, and preserving multicultural and religiously diversified iconography of long-lasting icon producti

Leila Khuskivadze

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection. Georgia Ornament in Medieval Georgian Repousse work Ornamental decoration is the branch of Georgian medieval art, distinguished with great accomplishments. In this regard, alongside with the architecture, repousse work occupies an important place. The array of these rich and diverse artworks demonstrates the complexity and variety of Georgian ornamental art, which on one hand reflects the traditions of Ancient Eastern and Greek-Roman world, and on the other, demonstrates the accomplishments of medieval culture in general. In addition the latter unveils the peculiarities, developed due to the Georgian masters' creativity, rich imagination and their relish for decorativeness. Georgian ornaments are someway linked with the Byzantine ones; however the ongoing stylistic changes, especially of foliage ornaments associate them with evolution processes of Greek and Western European ornament. The fact that repousse ornaments help to identify certain artistic schools or workshops assume the additional important role to them. The successful development of medieval repousse ornament in Georgia had a broad background ­ on one hand the rich traditions of pre-Christian Georgian art, and on the other, of folk art and namely of wood

88

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

carving. The study of Georgian repousse ornaments should be conducted in many different directions: the chronological grouping of ornamental motives, definition of their function, symbolic meaning, style, peculiarities, techniques, a search for a wide and rich parallel material, as well as their links with Georgian architectural decoration. As a consequence the conclusions of these studies will define the worth place of Georgian repousse ornament in the Georgian and world history of ornamental decoration.

Maria Lidova

Scuola Normale Superiora. Italy Creating a Liturgical Space: the Sinai Complex of Icons by Ioannes Tsohabi. This paper deals with six icons from the collection of St. Catherine's monastery on Mount Sinai in Egypt. Four of the panels are calendar icons. A fifth represents the Last Judgment while the last one bears a unique representation of five miraculous icons of the Virgin and a narrative cycle dedicated to the miracles and passions of Christ. A range from the late eleventh early twelfth century has been proposed for the dating of these images. This group of icons is one of several testimonies pointing to the active presence of Georgian monks on Sinai in the Middle Byzantine period. The Georgian origin of these images is confirmed not only by a particularly expressive style that still awaits detailed analysis and comparison with Georgian paintings, but also by bilingual inscriptions (every Greek name is complemented by its Georgian equivalent). A short Georgian inscription under the throne of Redeemer in the scene of the Last Judgment records the priest Ioannes Tsohabi as a commissioner of the icon. The same name, Ioannes, is cited in four large Greek epigrams that decorate the reverses of the icons. These Greek inscriptions are a work of a master poet, a great connoisseur of Greek texts and literature. Though these icons have already been discussed by various art historians, several problems remain unresolved. Previous studies have generally treated the icons individually. In this paper, I will analyze the icons as a single and coherent project. In my view, it is quite probable that all six were displayed together and thus created and defined a particular liturgical space. Their unity is confirmed by the sophisticated Greek epigrams, their original iconographic programs, and their stylistic and typological similarity. Through a comparison with illuminated manuscripts and monumental paintings, it is possible to demonstrate that the Sinai complex of icons had specific liturgical meanings. Finally, these icons are of great importance for understanding the mutual relations between Georgian and Byzantine art.

Nana Burchuladze

Georgian National Museum. Georgia Georgian Icons at St. Catherine's Monastery on Mount Sinai (To Georgian-Byzantine Interrelations) The Mount Sinai and the monastery of St. Catherine are among the most important spiritual centers of the Christian East. Georgians were always attracted to this sacred site ­ traces of their presence can be detected from the 6th century. The activities of Georgians were especially intense between the ninth and tenth centuries as evident from the amount of translated ecclesiastic literature and icons painted by Georgian monks. The Sinai collection of icons also comprised these relics brought from Georgia. Recently Georgian scholars were given the opportunity to study Georgian manuscripts kept on the Mount Sinai. The catalogue of this treasure was

89

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

also published. As for Georgian icons, little information exists on them. Obviously, in this situation the unveiling and study of each Georgian icon is of a special importance, as they provide the valuable information on the spiritual life and activities of Georgian monks on the Mount Sinai. The collection of documentary information regarding these icons from the collection of St. Catherine's Monastery and which were subsequently bought by a Russian collectors in the 19th century and which are lost for today, is a very important issue. The paper aims at presenting one of those Sinai icons, particularly the fragmented polyptych with Georgian inscriptions, which depicts common Christian Saints alongside Georgian saints--the Syrian and Athonite fathers and other Georgian eminent spiritual figures. The onsite study of the icon and of related material reveals that information regarding this work of art in scientific literature is misleading. While studying the icons, we had the opportunity to determine their composition and iconographic program, investigate the technique and style in which they were executed, as well as date this masterpiece to the first half of 14th century based on the comparative analyses. Along with the study of the aforementioned polyptych, we have also submitted relatively comprehensive information regarding the Georgian icons, which formed and continue to form a part of the Sinai Collection. We hope that the results of this accomplished study will be interesting and useful both for the study of the medieval Georgian icon painting and for the history of Sinai and Orthodox icons in general.

Alexsander Saminski

Andrei Rublev Museum, Russia The Miniatures and Origin of the Berti Gospel The Berti Gospel book (Tbilisi, Q-906) is famous for its late-twelfth-century silver-gilt covers made by the goldsmith Beshken at the Opiza Monastery. The manuscript was donated to the neighboring Monastery of Berti by a monk named Iovane Mtavraidze, who inherited it from his brother and uncle. Though his dedicatory inscription does not specify where the Gospel was copied, the book's miniatures provide key evidence for its origin. Though presently kept separately, they were at first integral to the volume, as it can be deduced from their page size and from the marginal traces of sewing holes that match those of the codex's binding. The Berti portrait of Saint Luke is a direct copy of a miniature in a late-twelfth-century manuscript at Dumbarton Oaks, Ms 4. The codices are also similar in terms of format, ruling type and number of lines per page. They should have been written at adjacent locations. The excellent execution of the Washington miniatures suggests Constantinopolitan origin, but the volume's modest headpieces in red ink and the mediocre quality of its parchment show that other possibilities should not be excluded. All of the Berti Gospels' evangelist portraits find close counterparts in a Georgian manuscript held at the St. Petersburg Institute of Oriental Studies, E 45. This codex probably has the same origin as the Berti and Washington ones. A Greek inscription of its owner under the image of Matthew suggests that in 1832 it was in a Greek milieu. Some of its headpieces closely resemble Greek and Georgian manuscripts produced in Antioch in the 11th century. One of those books is the present Tbilisi Q-371 copied by a priest named Iovane Mtavaraidze in 1091. The family of the owner of the Berti Gospels - Iovane Mtavraidze thus seems to have had old connections with Antioch

90

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

Nino Kavtaria

National Center of Manuscripts. Georgia Artistic Aspects of the 12th-13th c Georgian Gospels Illumination The political and cultural flourish in the 12th-13th century determined refined quality of Georgian manuscript illumination. Scriptoriums at numerous monastic centers throughout the country and abroad helped to meet the rising demand for books and especially on manuscript gospels. The paper aims at unveiling the artistic aspects of 12th-13th century Georgian manuscript gospels. Alongside, the famous Gelati Q-908, Jruchi #2 H-1667, and Vani A-1335 Gospels, the author explores the relatively less-known and studied 12th -13th century manuscripts. Their embellishment is reduced to such decorative elements as frames, headpieces, capital letters and the images of evangelists (A-281, Q-906, Q-907, Q-929, H-1707, H-2075, H-1706 ­ 12th c.; Q-883, Q-900, A-498, A-1563, Q-899 ­ 12th-13th c.; A-138, A-494, S-110, A-26 ­13th c). The illumination of these manuscripts clearly demonstrates an integral course of development, amplified decorativeness and outline softness, common palette, and diversity and richness of ornamental motives. Simultaneously, the synthesis of colorific and graphical tendencies is clearly observable. Despite common Byzantine influences, the illumination of several manuscripts also reflects the local artistic traditions. The ornamental decoration applied in cinnabar goes beyond the frame borders, conflates the capital letters, penetrates the text and altogether becomes one single whole. In addition, the use of ivory-white shade of the parchment as a color was a widespread method for that time. The paper aims at unveiling the iconographic, stylistic and artistic peculiarities of different artistic schools and at demonstrating the evolutionary course of Georgian manuscript illumination during these centuries.

Lali Osepashvili

Shota Rustaveli Theatre and Cinema University. Georgia The Peculiarities of the Decorative Design of the Georgian Liturgical Scrolls (XII-XIV centuries) The National Center of Manuscripts maintains a number of liturgical scrolls, the review of which will help us to make conclusions concerning the peculiarities of their design. It is known that manuscript liturgical scrolls are an innovation of the 11th century. The first Georgian manuscript scroll of this epoch is without any embellishment. From the 12th century, their design becomes more elaborate (S-4980). As with other canonical manuscripts, the scroll has its cover page (so called "kephi") on which a symbolic composition or an author's portrait is represented. The development of the cover page design can be explained as follows: If the cover page of the 12th-century scroll is decorated with the image of the life-giving column, the cover page of the 13th-century scroll (A-922) represents St. John Chrysostom as the author of the liturgics, while the miniature on the cover page of the 16th-century scroll (H-516) reveals some variations on both design. On the 16th-century scroll, we see a monumental cross and the authors of the liturgics, St. Basil the Great and St. John Chrysostom, integrating the Eucharistic and Golgotha (the Mount Calvary) misteries. From the 13th century there appear the capital letters appear on the marginal spaces. It is possible to differentiate them: 1) A simple first capital letter, outlined in cinnabar; 2) A complex featured capital letter, decorated with foliage or zoomorphic ornaments; and 3) Capital letters, with an image included in its ornamentation. This specificity of the scrolls design, starting from the 13th century evolved through the 16th century with some distinctions. We maintain scrolls decorated only with capital letters: H-521 (15th century); H-511 (16th

91

M E DI E VA L G EORG IA

century). Notwithstanding the specificity of a scroll design, the artist pursues the specified standards of a scroll design, as seen in the abundantly illustrated Gospels. For example, on the scroll from Svetistskhoveli, the text narrating the story of the Eucharist is divided horizontally by three horizontal compositions: "Christ with the Apostles," "Eucharist" initially with bread ("Sephiskveri"), and than with wine ("Zedashe"). We can also compare the Georgian Liturgical Scrolls with those of Byzantine, which confirms that, on the one hand, Georgian culture absorbs the accomplishments of the region's leading country, and on the other hand, formed stable national traditions. For example, unlike the Byzantines, the Georgian artist never uses the letter "Q" as a medallion and does not represent an image in it; Georgian artist makes it oval instead of circular and depicts Christ above it as a lord ­ dominant and all-mighty. Consequently, the design of the Liturgical Scrolls acquires the determined structure over centuries: the text is written in one column in Nuskhuri, has a cover page and capital letters on the marginal spaces.

Izolda Melikishvili

Georgian National Museum. Georgia The Symbolic Meaning of Color and Form of the Ecclesiastic Vestments Georgian artistic embroidery is most amply represented by the collection of the Georgian National Museum: Sh. Amiranashvili Art Museum. This collection in divided in two groups: secular and ecclesiastic embroidery, the latter unites the vestments of both clergy and ritual objects. According to the Old Testament, the clothing which the Lord approved to Aaron and other priests was to demonstrate their distinction from other humans. Likewise, the New Testament church established specific clothing for clergy, the origins of which date back to the period of Apostle's . Many assumptions exist regarding the outline and color of ancient worshiping vestment; however, one trait commonly mentioned (both in ecclesiastic and scientific literature) is that the ancient garment was white, like the "robes of angels". The right to wear this kind of vestment was and still is determined by the canons of Ecumenical Councils, which defined three types of ecclesiastic clothing and the number of clothing each religious figure should wear according to a pre-determined hierarchy (a deacon three, a priest five and an archbishop seven pieces). These vestments symbolize the clothing worn by the Savior during his earthly life and passions. Hence, the meaning of the outline and color of ecclesiastic vestments should be analyzed in this context. The study of the ecclesiastic vestments kept in the collection of Georgian State Museum gives rise to the following possible conclusions: 1. Like the rest of the orthodox world, the outline of Georgian ecclesiastic vestment draws upon two major outlines: the cross-the symbol of earthly and heavenly life-and the circle-a representation of perpetuity of existence, continuity, infinity and integrity. 2. The symbolic meaning of vestment rests upon the use of sacred numbers, which is connected with the notion of "duality", "trinity" and "seveniity". 3. Color, which played an important role in the eastern Christian World, has significant symbolic meaning in Georgian ecclesiastic vestment as well. The palette of seven major colors was already formed by the sixth century Byzantine color canonic; similarly, the vestment palette in Georgia also draws upon the structure of these colors. 4. The Georgian ecclesiastic vestment is distinguished by its modest and harmonious color spectrum. Color, with its symbolic meaning, is an important way of representing the infinity and chastity of service established by the Savior and St. Fathers and the verity of the true faith.

92

sastendo moxsenebebi / Poster Presentations

giorgi gagoSiZe. saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi. saqarTvelo qarTvelTa monasteri RaliaSi (kviprosi) Giorgi Gagoshidze. Georgian National Museum. Georgia Monastery of Georgians in Ghalia (Cyprus) giorgi pataSuri. g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo mcxeTis sveticxovlis fasadebze XI saukunis fenis gamoyofa da maTi rekonstruqciis cda Giorgi Patashuri. G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection. Georgia The definition of 11th c. Layer on the Facades of Svetitskhoveli and the Attempt its Reconstruction gulnaz baraTaSvili. saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi. saqarTvelo dafarnaTa kompleqti Tbilisis sionis taZridan Gulnaz Baratashvili. Georgian National Museum. Georgia The Aers from Sioni Church in Tbilisi dea gunia. axalgazrduli arasamTavrobo organizacia "dro da memkvidreoba". saqarTvelo safaris miZinebis taZari Dea Gunia. Youth NGO "Time and Heritage". Georgia The Church of the Dormition of the Virgin at Sapara eTer ediSeraSvili. g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo nadarbazevis sameklesiani bazilikis safasade skulptura (programis rekonstruqcia) Eter Edisherashvili. G. Chubinashvili National center of Georgian Art History and monuments protection. Georgia The Façade Sculpture of the Nadarbazevi Triple Church Basilica, (the Reconstruction of Program) eka berelaSvili. saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi. saqarTvelo mRvdelmTavar mitrofanes mitra Eka Berelashvili. Georgian National Museum. Georgia Mitre of Archbishop Mitrophane elene kavlelaSvili. saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi. saqarTvelo mxemis moxatuloba Elene Kavlelashvili. Georgian National Museum. Georgia Mkhemi Church Painting

93

vera SaniZe. saqarTvelos kulturis, ZeglTa dacvisa da sportis saministro. saqarTvelo XVI-XVIII saukuneebis saero arqiteqtura saqarTveloSi, iranuli stilistikis zegavlena Tu qarTuli auTentizmi? Vera Shanidze. Ministry of Culture, Monument protection and Sport of Georgia. Georgia The 16th-18th c Secular Architecture in Georgia, Persian Stilistic Influencies or Georgian Authenticity? irine mirijanaSvili. iv. javaxiSvilis sax. Tbilisis saxelmwifo universiteti, saqarTvelo Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelos sazRvrispira provinciebSi arsebuli monastrebis mniSvneloba (istoriuli hereTis magaliTze) Irine Mirijanashvili. I. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University. Georgia The Role of the Monasteries of the Marchlands of Medieval Georgia (on the Example of Hereti) maia karanaZe. xelnawerTa erovnuli centri. saqarTvelo ioane-zosimes xeliT Semosili kidev erTi xelnaweri Maia Karanadze. National Center of Manuscripts. Georgia One More Manuscript Adorned by Ioane Zosime mzisTvala kecxoveli. saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi. saqarTvelo samRvdelo olari anCidan Mzistvala Ketskhoveli. Georgian National Museum. Georgia Priest's Orarion from Anchi nino giorgobiani. sasuliero akademia. saqarTvelo bolnisis sionis moxatuloba da misi qtitorebi _ episkoposi nikolozi da mefe giorgi XI Nino Giorgobiani. Georgian Seminary. Georgia The Bolnisi Sioni Painting and its Donors: The Episcope Nikoloz and the King George XI nino daTunaSvili. saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi. saqarTvelo Tesalonike - gremi: aTonis mTis mxatvruli tradicia da leon kaxTa mefis RvawliT Seqmnili bolo ferweruli ansambli Nino Datunashvili. Georgian National Museum. Georgia The Thessalonica-Gremi: The Athonite Artistic Tradition and the Last Paintings Executed with the Efforts of Leon, King of Kakheti nino CixlaZe. saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi. saqarTvelo paleologosTa mxatvruli stilis moxatulobis fragmentebi martvilis eklesiidan Nino Chikhladze. Georgian National Museum. Georgia The Fragments of Palaeologan Style Paintings in Martvili

94

I I I seqcia

modernizmi saqarTveloSi

modernizmi saqarTveloSi

gaston buaCiZe

de l'Académie de Bretagne et des Pays de la Loire. safrangeTi qarTuli ferwera evropis konteqstSi: firosmani, lado gudiaSvili, daviT kakabaZe kiril da ilia zdaneviCebTan erTad, franguli warmoSobis mxatvari miSel le dantiu monawileobs firosmanis "aRmoCenaSi". firosmanis nawarmoebebi gamofenil iqna parizSi (andre marlos iniciativiT) da nantSi, 1999 wels. nantSi gamocemuli mSvenieri katalogi, franguli presis gamoxmaureba. le dantium, lui aragonma (da sxva xelovnebaTmcodneebma) firosmani Seadares jotos. p.pikaso xatavs firosmanis portrets. "aqtrisa margarita" TiTqosda ewviao firosmanis gamofenas parizSi sakuTari portretis sanaxavad. 1920-i an wlebSi daviT kakabaZe da lado gudiaSvili Sedian "parizis skolaSi" da mraval gamofenaSi monawileoben. 1925 wels moris reinali gudiaSvils monografias uZRvnis. gudiaSvilis naxatebi goias "kapriCosaa" Sedarebuli. gudiaSvili xvdeba iaponel fuJitas, italiel modilianis, polonel z. valiSevskis (gudiaSvili miziarebs samiveze Tavis mogonebebs). 1997 wels gudiaSvilis gamofena imarTeba parizSi, erovnul sakrebuloSi. katalogis gamocema. daviT kakabaZe aqveynebs parizSi statiaTa or qarTul krebuls ("parizi, 1920-1923", "xelovneba da sivrce", parizi, 1924-25) da erT wigns frangulad, ("konstruqtiuli suraTis Sesaxeb", gamomcemloba "Sen ver:). 1973 wels miSel sefori miziarebs Tavis mogonebebs da mesaubreba kakabaZis Semoqmedebaze. xelovnebis sakuTari koncefciis Camoyalibebisas, kakabaZe gansakuTrebiT leonardo da vinCisaken ixreba. 1982 wels, luiji magarotosa da misi kolegebis mier momzadebuli koleqtiuri krebuli gamodis veneciaSi: "avangardi TbilisSi", sadac saubaria, kerZod, gudiaSvilsa da kakabaZeze. kakabaZis peizaJebi moicaven sivrces misi mSobliuri imereTidan moyolebuli bretanamde. kakabaZis TqmiT, WeSmariti erovnuli xelovneba universaluri xelovnebis SeqmnaSi monawileobs.

giorgi xoStaria

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo binaruli opozicia niko firosmanaSvilisa da modernizmis mxatvrobaSi niko firosmanaSvilis mxatvrul wyobaSi aRiniSneba iseTi struqturuli Taviseburebebi romlebic arsebiTia Tanamedrove mxatvrobisTvisac. es aRniSnuli aqvT misi Semoqmedebis sxvadasxva mklevarebs (i. zdaneviCi, e. kuznecovi da sxv.) Tumca isini ar iZlevian am faqtis siRrmobriv analizs. modernizmis, rogorc epoqaluri movlenis erT-erT arsebiT maxasiaTeblad migvaCnia mxatvruli mTlianobis axleburi gaazreba binaruli opoziciis gamZafrebis safuZvelze. sxvadasxva skolebi, meTodologiuri principebis mqone mimarTulebebi Tu individebi sxvadasxva doneze, sxvadasxva siRrmiT iazreben am problemas. uaRresad saintereso da amasTan bolomde auxsnel faqtad gvevlineba is, rom n. firosmanaSvilTan vxedavT swored am mxatvrul-SemoqmedebiTi problemis Rrma, organul gaazrebas da maRal doneze

96

modernizmi saqarTveloSi

gadawyvetas. uaxlesi drois xelovneba iazrebs ra binaruli opoziciis fundamentalur sawyisebs, kerZod im faqts, rom nebismieri suraTi, rogorc mxatvruli nawarmoebi, warmoadgens ormagi niSnobrivi rigis gaerTianebas erT did niSanSi da, amdenad, suraTi aris samganzomilebiani, dinamikuri, SemousazRvravi. suraTgareSe arsebuli samyaros niSnebis gadatana organzomilebian SemosazRvrul materialur safuZvlebze, aZlierebs am dapirispirebas da cdilobs miiRos axali tipis mxatvruli mTlianoba. Tanamedrove xelovnebis etapebi da mimarTulebebi ZiriTadSi ganisazRvreba swored imiT, Tu rogor, ra doneze gaiazreba aRniSnuli problematika. am gzaze did etapobriv movlenad gvevlineba e. delakruas, impresionistebis da, gansakuTrebiT p. sezanis Semoqmedeba. sainteresoa, rom n. firosmanaSvilis Semoqmedebis Camoyalibeba xdeba imave periodSi, 1880-90-ian wlebSi, rodesac p. sezani agvirgvinebs Tavis Ziebebs. magram saocreba isaa, rom araviTari kontaqti n. firosmanaSvils parizTan da frangul skolasTan ar hqonia. am periodSi saqarTveloSi araTu Tanamedrove mxatvrobis, aramed zogadad realisturi dazguri mxatvrobis pirvel nabijebTan gvaqvs saqme. mxolod 1900iani wlebis dasawyisidan Cndeba saqarTveloSi pirveli niSnebi Tanamedrove mxatvrobisa, im dros rodesac firosmanaSvilTan swored 1900-ian wlebSi vxedavT ara pirvel nabijebs, aramed iseT maRali donis gadawyvetebs, romelic, rogorc wesi, miiReba mniSvnelovani evoluciuri gzis Semdgom. am problemis gadawyvetisas warmoqmnil winaaRmdegobaTa mogvarebis erT-erT arsebiT maorganizebel principad gvevlineba Sesrulebis mZafri lakonizmi, romelsac firosmanaSvilTan vxedavT ufro adre, vidre parizuli skolis mxatvrebTan. Cveni amocanaa aRniSnul debulebaTa TvalnaTlivi Cveneba.

liana anTelava

Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia. saqarTvelo samyaros sivrce/drois kontinualuri modeli qarTul mxatvrobaSi mxatvroba tradiciulad drois ar mqone sivrciT xelovnebaTa rigs ganekuTvneba. Tumca udaoa, rom yovelives, rac myofobs, gaaCnia droiTi maxasiaTebeli. drois specifikas warmoadgens is, rom igi grZnobaTa organoebis mier ar aRiqmeba, arasensorulia, zegrZnobadia da amitomac misi saxe mWidrodaa mijaWvuli metaforasTan (risi meSveobiTac xdeba zegrZnobadis modelireba) da ganpirobebulicaa metaforebiT. sivrciT xelovnebad artikulirebul mxatvrobaSi dro metaforis saxiT monawileobs. drois yvelaze ufro arsobriv da sayovelTao maxasiaTebel niSanTa rigs miekuTvneba sivrcesTan kavSiri. amitom bunebrivia drois arsis axsna sivrcisaTvis damaxasiaTebeli niSnebis meSveobiT. sivrce da dro warmoadgens samyaros suraTis dRemde cnobili ganmartebis "mzidav konstruqcias~. mxatvrobaSi dro metaforulad vlindeba tiloze. sivrce/drois urTierobiT mJRavndeba samyaros xedva/gancda. sivrce/drois kontinualur modelSi akumulirebulia ama Tu im kulturis, epoqis, stilis, mxatvris ZiriTadi fenomenuri niSnebi, romelTa gamovlena-Seswavla mkafiod warmoaCens ama Tu im kulturis gansakuTrebul individualobas. warmodgenil moxsenebaSi es sakiTxi ganxiluli iqneba niko firosmanaSvilis da daviT kakabaZis namuSevarTa magaliTze.

97

modernizmi saqarTveloSi

marina meZmariaSvili

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo firosmanis Semoqmedeba evropuli modernizmis CarCoebSi moxseneba eZRvneba TviTnaswavli xelovanis - niko firosmanis da dasavleT evropisa da ruseTis modernizmis Tematikas. moxsenebaSi ganixileba firosmanis xelovnebis ramdenime aspeqti, rogorc saqarTveloSi modernizmis pirveli gamoxatuleba. firosmans ar miuRia profesiuli ganaTleba da igi tfilisis sazogadoebis yvelaze dabali fenis warmomadgeneli iyo. firosmanis fenomeni mxatvris SemoqmedebaSi grZnobebis asaxvaSi mdgomareobs, romelic codnas ar eqvemdebareba. firosmanis Semoqmedebis sawyis etapze Seiqmna namuSevrebi, romelic me-20 saukunis dasawyisSi axali iyo dasavleT evropisa da ruseTisaTvis, amasTan ki, ucxo saqarTvelosaTvis. firosmanis namuSevrebi agreTve mniSvnelovania sivrcis, feris da formis gansakuTrebuli, SemoqmedebiTi midgomis TvalsazrisiT. aRniSnuli problemebi imave dros arsebobda ruseTis, safrangeTisa da germaniis SemoqmedebiT samyaroSi. moxsenebaSi firosmanis Sedarebulia a. rusos, p. pikasos, n. gonCarovas, m. Sagalis, a. makisa da sxva SemoqmedTa namuSevrebs. moxseneba miuTiTebs firosmanis Semoqmedebis zegavlenaze rusul "neo-primitivizm"-sa da avangarduli xelovnebis sxva mimdinareobebze. rusma mxatvrebma - m. le dantium da m. SevCenkom firosmanis namuSevrebi gadaakeTes. zemoaRniSnuli sakiTxi dRemde TiTqmis Seuswavleli iyo. rusi mxatvrebis is namuSevrebi, romlebic sazogadoebisaTvis iyo cnobili, arasodes ganixileboda, rogorc reproduqciebi. Cven yuradRebas vamaxvilebT rusi avangarduli mimdinareobis wamyvani mxatvris le dantiusa da futuristTa - iliazdisa da kirile zdaneviCis rolze, romlebmac aRmoaCines firosmani da misi namuSevrebi gaacnes saqarTvelos, ruseTsa da safrangeTs (1972 wels p. pikasom Seqmna firosmanis portreti). firosmanis fenomeni dasavleTisa Tu aRmosavleTis, erovnuli Tu msoflio xelovnebis mimarTulebebiT, folklorisa da modernizmis SemoqmedebiTi ideebiTaa gamsWvaluli.

nana yifiani

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo "poeturad binadrobs adamiani" XX saukunis dasawyisis qarTuli saxviTi da literaturuli modernizmi, romelsac tfilisur modernizmsac uwodeben, axali da uaxlesi qarTuli kulturis istoriaSi yvelaze Tavisufalia Tavisi arsiT da imavdroulad yvelaze tragikuli bedis mqone. moxsenebis mizania dasvas tfilisuri modernizmis erovnuli identurobis problema, rac xsenebuli Tavisufali kulturul-mxatvruli cnobierebis pirobebSi mis vizualur Tu sityvier teqstebSi wakiTxvadia. identurobis problemis dayeneba aqtualuria gamomdinare qarTuli modernizmis

98

modernizmi saqarTveloSi

aRniSnuli tragikuli bedidanac. mas, romlis droiTi sazRvrebi sul ori aTwleulia, (1910-1920-iani wlebi), dReisaTvis mcire niSac ar ukavia msoflios/dasavleTis modernizmis istoriaSi. amis mizezi saqarTvelos politikur-kulturuli mdgomareobaa - erTi mxriv, sabWouri 1930-iani wlebidan, zogadad modernistuli xelovneba, Tavad rusuli revoluciuri avangardic ki, ukve represirebulia. meore mxriv, 1921 wels aneqsirebuli saqarTvelos kulturam erTiani sabWouri kulturul-esTetikuri sivrcis Seqmnis mizniT lokalurad, Tavad saqarTveloSic ki, ara Tu mis sazRvrebs miRma, akrZalvebis Sedegad marginalizacia ganicada. sabWoTa kulturis politikis mier erovnuli kulturebis marginalizacias darTulma modernizmis akrZalvam Cveni mexsierebidan srulad amoSala XX saukunis dasawyisis qarTuli saxelovnebo cxovreba. Cven axla viwyebT ara Tu am fenomenis gaazrebas istoriul-RirebulebiTi, mxatvrul-RirebulebiTi TvalsazrisiT, aramed faqtobrivi masalebis aRmoCena-aRwera-dokumentaciasac ki. arsebobs kidev erTi Seferxeba, rac modernisti mxatvrebis Semoqmedebis interpretacias, maT arazust konteqstSi ganTavsebas Seexeba: sabWour periodSi represiebs fizikurad gadarCenili modernistebis 1910-20-iani wlebis Semoqmedeba gasagebi garemoebebis gamo ganixileboda axalgazrda mxatvarTa modernizmiT erTgvari "gatacebis" periodad, sabWoTa periods Tanxvedrili maTi represirebuli xelovneba ki, erTgvar evoluciur-ganviTarebad WrilSi warmodgnideboda, da Zalauneburad socialisturi realizmis konteqstSi Tavsdeboda. dRes es ase aRar aris, magram jer-jerobiT mainc ar xdeba am ori mdgomareobis - modernulisa da socialistur-komunisturis, konceftualurad Tu konteqstualurad urTierTgamijnva, rac moitans Tavad tfilisuri modernizmis reabilitacias, misi mxatvruli da istoriuli Rirebulebebis gansazRvras; meore - sabWouri sistemis mier Seqmnili da dRemde moqmedi kulturuli da saxelovnebo ierarqiis demontaJs. moxsenebaSi identurobis konteqstSi daismeba erTi problema kategoriaTa WriliT. esaa sivrcis kategoria: romeli sivrcea tfilisuri modernizmisTvis faseuli; rogori mniSvnelobisaa igi dro-sivrcis urTierTobis modernistul konteqstSi. sivrcis gaazrebis specifika asaxavs tfilisuri modernizmis erT Taviseburebas. moxseneba daeyrdnoba SedarebiT analizs: 1. Tanadroul dasavlur da rusul masalasTan da, 2. qarTuli Sua saukuneebis arqiteqturasa da kedlis mxatvrobasTan. moSveliebuli iqneba rogorc evropuli Sua saukuneebis, ise bizantiuri arqiteqturisa da mxatvrobis nimuSebi.

ana SanSiaSvili

xelovnebis saerTaSoriso centri iv. javaxiSvilis sax. Tbilisis saxelmwifo universiteti. saqarTvelo niko firosmanaSvilis ferwera XIX s-is bolosa da XX s-is dasawyisis evropuli mxatvrobis konteqstSi qarTuli ferweris erT-erTi yvelaze mniSvnelovani figuris _ niko firosmanaSvilis Semoqmedebas mravali iseTi Tavisebureba axasiaTebs, rac mis mxatvrobas XIX s-is bolosa da XX s-is dasawyisis evropuli xelovnebis sxvadasxva mimdinareobebTan akavSirebs. cnobilia, rom firosmanaSvils xSirad TviTnaswavl "naiv" an "primitivist" mxatvrad ganixilaven, Tumca mkvlevarTa umetesoba aRiarebs qarTveli mxatvris Semoqmede99

modernizmi saqarTveloSi

bis gansakuTrebul siRrmes da mravalmxrivobas - firosmanis figuris mniSvnelobas erTiorad zrdis is, rom qarTveli mxatvari Tavisi Semoqmedebis manZilze sruliad damoukideblad, intuitiurad mivida imave mxatvrul principebamde, romlebsac amave periodis dasavleT evropaSi mTeli mxatvruli skolebi da mimdinareobebi amuSavebdnen. qarTvel mxatvars gamoarCevs detalisa da mTlianobis erTdroulad SegrZnebis Tandayolili unari. mis namuSevrebSi ukugdebulia bevri detali, rac mis mier Seqmnil saxeebs pirobiT, monumentur, zogjer erTgvar "abstraqtul" saxeebad warmogvidgens. es principi mas evropuli modernizmis sxvadasxva mimdinareobebTan anaTesavebs: cnobilia, rom formis "sisufTavis", sisadavis problema Tanamedrove mxatvrobis erT-erT umTavres principad iqca. mTavari, formis naturalisturad asaxvis nacvlad, asaxulis arsis wvdoma da garkveuli deformaciiT, meorexarisxovani detalebis nivelirebiT Tu pirobiTobis xarisxis gazrdiT misi warmoCena gaxda. swored es principi, romelic TvalsaCinod da Taviseburadaa gamovlenili firosmanis SemoqmedebaSi safuZvlad daedo Tanamedrove xelovnebis sxvadasxva mimdinareobas: esqpresionizs, kubizms, abstraqcionizms da a.S. p. sezanis, matisisa da derenis muSaobis stils mogvagonebs niko firosmanaSvils farTo monasmi, weris Tavisufali manera, erTi amosunTqviT muSaoba. P. sezanis muSaobis teqnikasTan msgavsebaze miuTiTebs firosmanis Sav muSambaze xatvis manerac. cnobilia, rom p. sezani Tavis mxatvrobaSi tilos TeTr fers iseve iyenebda, rogorc amas niko Savi muSambis SemTxvevaSi akeTebda _ rodesac Savi feri sWirdeboda, fonad Tavisufal adgils tovebda. amave kavSirze miuTiTebs mxatvris mier sxvadasxva ferebisTvis miniWebuli simboluri mniSvneloba, rac Tanamedrove evropuli mxatvrobis sxvadasxva mimdinareobebis: postimpresionizmis, simbolizmis Tu abstraqcionizmisaTvis aris damaxasiaTebeli. igive SeiZleba iTqvas naxatSi warwerebis damoukidebel kompoziciur elementad CarTvze, rac evropaSi pirvelad 1911 wels kubistebma gamoiyenes. mxatvrobis Tavisufali teqnika, kompoziciis sisadave, feris mniSvneloba Tu warwerebis gamoyeneba niko firosmanaSvils modernizmis epoqis mowinave mxatvarTa rigSi ayenebs.

nestan TaTaraSvili

damoukidebeli mkvlevari. saqarTvelo evropuli kulturuli memkvidreoba - modernis stilis arqiteqtura saqarTveloSi XIX s-is dasasruls evropaSi Camoyalibebuli axali stili, romelsac saqarTveloSi moderns vuwodebT, sxvadasxva saxeliT - Art Nouveau, Jugendstil, Secession, Modernista, Liberty da sxv. swrafad damkvidrda msoflios bevr qveyanaSi da maT Soris saqarTveloSic. sxva stilebisgan gansxvavebiT, moderni ar gvTavazobs winaswar SemuSavebul da dadgenil formebs. is gamoricxavda meqanikur gameorebas da iTxovda mxolod sakuTari ideebisa da Temebis Tavisufal improvizacias, rasac Cvenma ostatebma warmatebiT gaarTves Tavi. saqarTveloSi modernis stiliT Sendeboda ara marto dedaqalaq TbilisSi, aramed sxva, SedarebiT patara qalaqebSi: soxumSi, baTumSi, foTSi, quTaisSi, gagraSi, axal aTonSi, qobuleTSi, duSeTSi.

100

modernizmi saqarTveloSi

sacxovrebeli da saSemosavlo saxlebis garda, Zalze xSiria modernis sxva funqciis Senobebic: bankebi, saswavleblebi, maRaziebi, saavadmyofoebi, saxelosnoebi, Teatrebi, oranJerea. aRsaniSnavia, rom gvaqvs, agreTve, modernis stilis Tambaqos fabrika da Tboeleqtrosadguri TbilisSi, xolo biblioTeka da etlebis sadgomi - foTSi. modernis SesaniSnavi memorialuri Zeglebia daculi Zvel, istoriul sasaflaoebze. gansakuTrebuli aRniSvnis Rirsia modernis stilis kinoTeatrebi. cnobilia, rom modernisa da kinos gaCenisa da gavrcelebis TariRebi TiTqmis emTxveva erTmaneTs da amitom Zalian mniSvnelovania, rom maSindeli msoflios am ori novaciis Tanxvedra ase warmatebulad ganxorcielda saqarTveloSi. samwuxarod, modernis Senobebis gamovlenis samuSaoebi, iseve rogorc sruli saarqivo kvleva - dausrulebelia, Tumca Cven xelT arsebuli masala naTlad adasturebs, rom evropasTan aRdgenilma kulturul-ekonomikurma urTierTobam saqarTvelos saSualeba misca daenerga da gaevrcelebina maSindel msoflioSi yvelaze popularuli - modernis stilis arqiteqtura. moderns Tavisi kuTvnili adgili sWirdeba ara marto qarTul samecniero naSromebSi, aramed saswavlo saxelmZRvaneloebsa da turistul gzamkvlevebSi. saqarTvelos modernis stilis arqiteqturam ukanasknel wlebSi cnobili saerTaSoriso organizaciebis: niu iorkis "msoflio ZeglTa fondis", briuselis "modernis qselisa" da barselonas "modernis evropuli marSrutis" yuradReba miipyro da amJamad Cveni modernis amsaxveli masalebi maT mier rogorc internetSi, agreTve sxvadasxva saerTaSoriso gamocemebSia ganTavsebuli. saqarTvelos moderni - evropuli kulturuli memkvidreoba - Tavad evropam ukve Seafasa da mas saTanado adgilic miuCina. jeri axla Cvenzea, radgan moderni saqarTveloSi dRemde kvlav srulyofilad Seuswavleli da amasTanave - Seufasebeli da daucvelia; daucveli rogorc ngrevisa da ganadgurebisgan, aseve ukanasknel wlebSi gaxSirebuli mcdari da samecniero safuZvels moklebuli restavraciisgan.

maia ciciSvili

iv. javaxiSvilis sax. Tbilisis saxelmwifo universiteti. saqarTvelo eqspresionizmidan dadamde 1910-1930-iani wlebis qarTul mxatvrobaSi (axlad aRmoCenili masalis safuZvelze) bolo wlebis ganmavlobaSi, yvela, vinc ki 1910-1930-iani wlebis qarTul avangards Sexebia, cnobili mizezebis Sedegad faqtobrivad ucnobs, imdenad gaocebula misi daxvewili saxviTobiT, Taviseburi, TiTqos faruli simZafriT, sisadavis mniSvnelovnebiT, mravalferovnebiTa da TavisTavadobiT, rom aSkarad moulodnelobisa Tu gakvirvebis gamo es movlena nawilobriv SemTxveviTobas miewera. yvela es Tviseba, romelic XX saukunis pirveli mesamedis qarTul xelovnebas Tanadrouli evropulisgan ramdenadme gamoarCevs, faqtobrivad ucvlel niSnad gasdevs mas mTeli arsebobis manZilze. am periodis qarTvel xelovanTa SemoqmedebaSi (ferwera, grafika, Teatraluri mxatvroba da wignis grafika) gaziarebulia evropuli avangardis TiTqmis yvela ZiriTadi mimdinareoba. XX saukunis dasawyisSi, maSin rodesac avangardulma ganwyobam evropis mravali qalaqi moicva, Tbilisic Tavisi tradiciuli gaxsnilobiTa da axlis miRebis mzaobiT, CarTuli aRmoCnda am Tanadroul mowinave saerTaSoriso moZraobaSi. SeiZleba iTqvas, qarTuli mxatvroba yvelaze bunebrivad da Tavisuflad swored 1910-1920-ian wlebSi

101

modernizmi saqarTveloSi

viTardeboda. sagulisxmoa, rom avangardul xelovnebas yvela mxatvari individualurad miudga: Tu zogierTis SemoqmedebaSi mxolod erTi an ori mimdinareobis midevneba vlindeba (S. qiqoZe, v. sidamon-erisTavi, k. zdaneviCi, i. zdaneviCi, e. axvlediani, d. TavaZe), sxvebTan ramdenime mimarTulebis Tanmimdevruli gadamuSaveba da gaTaviseba iCens Tavs (d. kakabaZe, l. gudiaSvili, i. gamrekeli, d. SevardnaZe), zogjer ki, qarTveli modernistis nawarmoebebi imdenad saxecvlili da Taviseburia, rom pirdapiri analogis moZiebac ki Zneldeba (p. ocxeli). sazogadoebisaTvis naklebad cnobili da, gansakuTrebiT ki, ukanaskneli sami wlis manZilze aRmoCenili ucnobi masalis, Tamami, zogjer ukiduresad avangarduli nawarmoebebis, Cveneba da ganxilva kidev ufro srulad warmoadgens qarTveli modernistebis Semoqmedebas da garkveulad Secvlis aqamde arsebul Sexedulebas maT mxatvrobaze. ra Tqma unda mravali wlis manZilze faqtobrivad miuwvdomeli masalis Ziebebisa da aRmoCenebis procesi grZeldeba, Tumca Sesrulebuli samuSao ukve iZleva xSirad moulodneli da metad sagulisxmo nawarmoebebis garkveulwilad Sejamebisa da analizis saSualebas.

irine abesaZe

SoTa rusTavelis saxelobis Teatrisa da kinos saxelmwifo universiteti. saqarTvelo qarTuli modernizmidan - transavangardamde, anu kidev erTxel terminTa definiciis Sesaxeb xelovanis mier samyaros aRqmisas, mkveTrad gamoxatulma negaciam, msoflio omebiTa da revoluciebiT provocirebulma, erTmaneTis miyolebiT warmoSva is mxatvruli mimdinareobebi, romlebic erTi saerTo saxelwodebis "modernizmis" qveS gaerTianda. am mimarTulebaTa mimdevrebi adamianis miusafrobis, gaucxoebis SegrZnebis, totaluri Zaladobis winaSe SiSis sindromis ama Tu im formiT dafiqsirebas cdilobdnen. samyaros mosalodneli aRsasrulis mtkivneulma gancdam, esqatologiurma xilvebma Tavis apogeas XX s-is 60-70-ian ww. miaRwia, rodesac sakacobrio WerqveS erTmaneTisgan damoukideblad, cnobili kulturologebi da filosofosebi alaparakdnen imis Sesaxeb, rom amgvarad veRar gagrZeldeboda. SemTxveviTi ar aris, rom XX saukunis udides filosofoss m. haidegers egzistencializmTan erTad, postmodernistuli msoflmxedvelobis erTerT pirvel Semoqmedad miiCneven. swored mas ekuTvnis azri, rom "postmodernizmi imitom ki ar warmoiSva, rom daasamaros misi winamorbedi modernistuli mimarTuleba, aramed imisaTvis, rom samyaros axali sazrisi SesZinos". marTalia, XX s-is 80-90-ian ww. qarTul kulturul arealSi mimdinare samxatvro procesebze saubari, maTi Sefasebis TvalsazrisiT, jer kidev naadrevia, vinaidan, jer kidev ar dasrulebula maTi ideur-formaluri Camoyalibeba. dReisaTvis mxolod im tendenciebis konstataciaa SesaZlebeli, romelic saxezea, esenia: 1) abstraqciuli mxatvrobis nonfiguratulobis sapirispirod, neofigurativizmis damkvidreba; 2) groteskis,ironiis ZiriTad mxatvrul xerxebad gamoyeneba; 3)stiluri ekleqtizmis damkvidreba, interteqstualoba;4) religiuri da miTologiuri motivaciebis arseboba; 5) istoriuli warsulis nostalgia.; 6) ormagi kodirebis tendencia. aRsaniSnavia, rom terminebi "modernizmi" da "avangardizmi", iseve, rogorc

102

modernizmi saqarTveloSi

maTi Semdgomi, mimarTulebebi "postmodernizmi" da "transavangardi" samecniero literaturaSi xSirad erTmaneTiTaa Canacvlebuli urTierTTavsebadi bunebisa da arsobrivi identurobis gamo. aqedan gamomdinare, mxolod SeTanxmebis doneze unda gadawydes qarTul saxelovnebo sivrceSi romeli definiciebia ufro morgebuli, rom ar daibnes gaucnobierebeli recipienti. Tu gaviTvaliswinebT, rom XX -is 80-ani w. kulturuli tendenciebis misamarTiT termin "postmodernizms" pirvelad vxvdebiT frangi filosofosis J. bodriaris naSromebSi, Semdeg italieli p.portogezi am termins mxolod 80 - 90-ani ww. arqiteqturasTan mimarTebiT ixmars, termin "transavangards"ki, safuZvels umagrebs meore italieli profesori b. oliva, romelmac pirvelma wamoayena xelovnebis ganviTarebis transavangarduli koncefcia. aqedan gamomdinare, SesaZloa Tanamedrove qarTuli mxatvrobis konteqstSi ufro upriania "transavangardis" gamoyeneba. erTi ram cxadia, romeli terminic ar unda SeirCes XX-is 80-ani ww. samxatvro tendenciebis aRsaniSnavad, postsabWour sivrceSi moxvedrilma saqarTvelos SemoqmedebiT-inteleqtualurma garemom spontanurad moaxdina adekvaturi reaqcia da transavangarduli elementebiT gaajera qarTuli saxviTi xelovneba. amaSi ki, mas safuZveli XX s.dasawyisis qarTulma avangardulma memkvidreobam gaumagra.

Tea tabataZe

Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia. saqarTvelo modernistuli artistuli kafeebis zogierTi Taviseburebis gansazRvrisaTvis. (,,qimerionis" moxatulobis ideur-Sinaarsobrivi metyvelebis Sesaxeb) artistuli kabare/klubi/kafe adreuli modernizmis erT-erTi mniSvnelovani movlenaa. swored XIX saukunis bolosa da XX saukunis dasawyisis evropasa da ruseTTan mimarTebaSi saubroben kabaretul moZraobaze, kabaretul stilze, "kafes kulturaze". am sakiTxTan dakavSirebuli literaturis analizi gvafiqrebinebs, rom artistuli kabare/klubi/kafeebis Seqmna konkretuli kulturul-esTetikuri modernuli konteqstis, qveynis politikur-socialuri viTarebisa da sazogadoebis garkveuli fsiqologiuri ganwyobis erTobliobiT iyo ganpirobebuli, rac misi gaerTianebis, erTad yofnis survilsa da safuZvels qmnida; am dawesebulebaTa daarsebis qronologias, funqcionirebis xasiaTsa da sazogadoebaSi maT socialuresTetikur funqcias gansazRvravda. amitomac, artistul kabareebs yvela qveyanasa da qalaqSi sxvadasxva dros Tavisi saxe, ganumeorebeli garemo, sakuTari « Tema » hqonda. es konteqsti TbilisSi 1910-iani wlebisTvis iqmneba da swored am periodSi vrceldeba CvenSi ,,kabaretuli epidemiac". artistuli kafe-klubebis tradicia saqarTveloSi ruseTidan Semodis, maTi daarseba qarTvelebTan erTad im periodSi TbilisSi myofi sxvadasxva erovnebis modernistebis mier xdeba. ruseTis artistul klubebs ukavSirdeba maTi moxatvis tradiciac. amasTanave, XX saukunis 10-iani wlebSi am dawesebulebaTa simravle da aqtiuri, mravalferovani funqcionireba miuTiTebs, rom es kafeebi Tbilisis kulturuli sivrcis bunebrivi da logikuri nawilia, rac, garkveulwilad, imis maniSnebelicaa, rom am periodis qarTuli kultura modernizmis erTiani diskursis nawilad moiazreba. meore mxriv, Tbilisis artistuli kafeebi, kerZod ,,qimerioni", gansvavebuli xasiaTisaa, radgan im garemos, im sazogadoebis sulieri, msoflmxedvelobrivi,

103

modernizmi saqarTveloSi

esTetikur/eTikuri miswrafebebis Sesabamisad yalibdeba, romlis wiaRSic ibadeba. am xasiaTis ganmsazRvrelad ramdenime faqtori gvesaxeba: 1. istoruli da politikuri viTareba (damoukideblobis wlebi), rac sazogadoebis fsiqologiur ganwyobasac ganapirobebs; 2. Tavad qalaqi Tbilisi - misi Tvisebrioba, misi cxovrebisa Tu masSi Tanacxovrebis wesi. 3. Tbilisis modernuli kulturis, xelovnebis xasiaTi: misi mraval-Tu-internacionaluri buneba da am periodis qarTvel SemoqmedTa umTavresi esTetikuri amocana: "erovnuli da sayovelTao" - xelovnebis daniSnulebisa da qveynis mimarT damokidebulebis gansazRvra; am damokidebulebis mimarT maSindeli sazogadoebis erTsulovneba; "qimerioni" sinTezuri struqturaa - kedlis mxatvrobiT Semkuli garkveuli funqciis mqone sivrce, Sesabamisad, istoriul-droiTi Tu socialuri mimarTebebi, XX saukunis dasawyisis Tbilisis SemoqmedebiTi sazogadoebis msoflmxedveloba da miswrafebebi esTetikuri formiT ganivrcoba kafes moxatulobaSic - upirveles yovlisa, mis ideurSinaarsobriv metyvelebaSi. am mxriv ,,qimerionis" mxatvroba erTiani sistema, mxatvruli mTlianobaa, Tumca ki, es mTlianoba sam individualobas (l.gudiaSvili, d.kakabaZe, s.sudeikini), sam subieqtur xedvas, sam damoukidebel Tematikas da or gansxvavebul kulturas moicavs.

mzia CixraZe

g. CubinaSvilis sax. qarTuli xelovnebis istoriis da ZeglTa dacvis erovnuli kvlevis centri. saqarTvelo futuristuli wigni, Tbilisi 1917-1919 moxseneba Seexeba Tbilisis kuturuli cxovrebis erT-erT mniSvnelovan mxatvrul movlenas - 1910-1920-ian wlebSi gamocemul futuristul wignebs, rac mxatvarTa da literatorTa interkulturuli, internacionaluri TanamSromlobis magaliTs warmoadgens. naSromSi daxasiaTebulia is winapirobebi, rac aRniSnul movlenas uZRoda win, anu warmodgenilia am periodis Tbilisuri mxatvrul-kulturuli cxovrebis mokle mimoxilva. naSromSi ganxilulia Tanamedrove xelovnebis mimdinareoba, romelic cnobilia futurizmis saxeliT da aRniSnuli mimdinareobis iseTi umniSvnelovanesi movlena, rogoricaa futuristuli wigni. warmodgenilia evropuli (italiuri) da rusuli futurizmis SedarebiTi daxasiaTeba, mimoxilulia italiuri futuristuli wigni da masTan kavSirSi sxva mxatvruli movlenebi, romelTac seriozuli roli iTamaSes modernizmisa da, konkretulad, futuristuli wignis Seqmnasa da ganviTarebaSi. xazgasmulia aRniSnuli mimdinareobis fuZemdeblis filipo tomazo marinetis roli futurizmis da futuristuli wignis CamoyalibebaSi. aseve ganxilulia miseuli futuristuli filosofiis Teoriuli safuZvlebi. gansakuTrebuli adgili eTmoba rusul futuristul wigns, romelic gamoicemoda moskovsa da peterburgSi 1910-ian wlebSi da romelmac didwilad ganapiroba Tbilisuri futuristuli wignis warmoSoba. warmodgenilia rusuli da Tbilisuri futuristuli wignebis paraleluri analizi, dadgenilia maTi saerTo niSnebi da agreTve Tbilisuri futuristuli broSurebis ganmasxvavebeli, specifikuri maxasiaTeblebi. gamokveTilia poet ilia zdaneviCis figura da misi mniSvneloba qarTuli modernizmis

104

modernizmi saqarTveloSi

ganviTarebisaTvis, xazgasmulia misi wvlili futuristuli xelovnebisa da dadaizmis CamoyalibebaSi 1910-iani wlebis TbilisSi. ganxilulia futuristuli organizaciis "410" sagamomcemlo saqmianoba 1917-1919 wlebSi, rac umniSvnelovanesi furcelia Tbilisis kulturul cxovrebaSi. organizaciam kruConixis, terentievis, ilia da kirile zdaneviCebis, valiSevskis TaosnobiTa da monawileobiT sxvadasxva gamomcemlobaSi mravali saintereso wigni dabeWda, romlebic 1912-1913 wlebSi peterburgsa da moskovSi gamocemuli futuristuli wignebis xelaxali gamocema iyo. gansakuTrebuli yuradReba aqvs daTmobili futuristuli literaturis erTgvar anTologiad qceul krebuls, romelic msaxiob sofia melnikovas mieZRvna. wigni 1919 wels gamovida da is ara marto qarTuli da rusuli, aramed saerTod, Tanamedrove evropuli wignis grafikis xelovnebis mniSvnelovan monapovrad iqca. daskvnaSi gamokveTilia TbilisSi 1910-1920-ian wlebSi gamocemuli futuristuli wignebis, rogorc mxatvruli movlenis, mniSvneloba qarTuli modernizmis Camoyalibebisa da ganviTarebisaTvis, xazgasmulia misi wvlili zogadad futuristuli wignis ganviTarebaSi.

nino zaaliSvili

Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia. saqarTvelo 1920-30-iani wlebis qarTuli grafikis zogierTi tendencia XX saukunis dasawyisSi qarTul grafikaSi adre dawyebuli sakuTari saxis Ziebis procesi, romelic daiwyo SedarebiT martivad, Zveli qarTuli xelovnebis sxvadasxva dargis nimuSebis ubralo citirebiT, gagrZelda miRebuli impulsebis gaazrebuli, SemoqmedebiTad aTvisebis mimarTulebiT. amasTan, mxatvrebi ar ifarglebodnen mxolod amgvari ZiebiT _ maTi interesis sagans warmoadgenda rogorc evropuli, ise aRmosavluri xelovneba. gansakuTrebuli mniSvneloba SeiZina modernis stilma da garkveulwilad o.berdsleis Semoqmedebamac. modernis stilma saqarTveloSi gavlena ufro didxans SeinarCuna, vidre evropaSi, rasac xels uwyobda 1922 wels daarsebul samxatvro akademiaSi peterburgidan revoluciis Semdgom gadmosaxlebuli mxatvrebis, "mir iskustvas" warmomadgenlebis e.lanseres da i.Sarlemanis SemoqmedebiTi da pedagogiuri saqmianoba. avangardistuli mimdinareobebis farTo speqtri grafikaSi popularuli gaxda 191821 wlebSi damoukidebel saqarTveloSi emigrirebul rus mxatvrebTan kontaqtebis Sedegad. i.gamrekelis, b.gordezianis, k.zdaneviCis, e.la laevas eqspresionistuli, konstruqtivistuli namuSevrebi aisaxa qarTuli wignis da saJurnalo grafikaSi, dazgur furclebSi. zogierTi grafikosis SemoqmedebaSi (l.grigolia) garkveuli mniSvneloba mieca ramdenime popularuli evropeli mxatvris Semoqmedebasac (f.valatoni, f.mazereeli). scenograf petre ocxelis grafikul furclebSi aseve aqtiurad SeigrZnoba o.berdsleis, l.baqstis, g.klimtis namuSevrebis gamoZaxili. 1930-iani wlebis ideologiurma wnexma negatiuri gavlena qarTul grafikazec moaxdina. mravali grafikosi (zemoT dasaxelebul mxatvrebTan erTad k,kvesi, k.gricai, i.Stenbergi) gamoeTiSa samxatvro process, p.ocxeli daxvrites. 1930-ian wlebSi da mogvianebiTac grafikosebi l.gudiaSvili, s.gabaSvili agrZeleben Tavis ilustraciul da dazgur grafikaSi evropuli da aRmosavluri xelovnebis

105

modernizmi saqarTveloSi

qarTul ZirebTan Sejerebis process. ramdenadme gansxvavebuli mimarTulebiT muSaobs s.qobulaZe, romelic aqcents renesansis xelovnebis interpretirebaze akeTebs, Tumca sicocxlis bolos p.pikasos neogrekuli stiliT interesdeba. saukeTeso namuSevrebSi qarTvel grafikosTa Taobebi agrZeleben 1920-30-ian wlebSi gamokveTil miswrafebas kulturul dialogSi monawileobisaken, erovnuli xelovnebis harmoniuli CarTvisaken msoflioSi mimdinare aqtualur samxatvro procesebSi.

qeTevan SavguliZe

Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia. saqarTvelo montaJis principebi qarTul scenografiaSi (1920-iani wlebi) 1920-ian wlebSi novatori reJisorebisa da scenografebis namuSevrebSi montaJis principebma da kinoxelovnebis specifikurma saSualebebma aqtiurad iCina Tavi. rusuli Teatris scenaze vs. meierholdis xelmZRvanelobiT Seqmnili speqtaklebis saerTo sadekoracio sistemaSi uSualod iqna CarTuli ekrani, romelic agitaciuri xelovnebis efeqtur saSualebad iqca. msoflio Teatris masStabiT sayuradRebo movlenas warmoadgenda germaniaSi e. piskatoris da dadaisti mxatvrebis mier proeqciuli dekoraciis dargSi ganxorcielebuli avangarduli Teatraluri eqsperimentebi. 1920-ian wlebis miwuruls qarTveli scenografebi sasceno sivrcis gegmarebis axali principebis Ziebis procesSi novatoruli _ kinematografiuli xerxebiT dainteresdnen. speqtaklis "hopla, Cven vcocxlobT!" (es 1928w. k. marjaniSvilis TaosnobiT Camoyalibebuli quTaisi-baTumis saxelmwifo dramatuli Teatris pirveli warmodgenaa) d. kakabaZis mier, el. axvledianis saintereso scenografiuli namuSevrebi mohyva ("rogor?", "moxuci enTuziasti", "xatije"). speqtaklebis sadekoracio sistemaSi CarTuli iqna specifikuri kinematografiuli saSualebebi _ ekrani da proeqciuli aparatura. scenuri moqmedebis ganviTareba-gagrZelebis mizniT ekranze specialurad speqtaklisaTvis gadaRebuli kinokadrebis demonstrireba xdeboda. Teatris msaxiobis mier kinokadrSi "dawyebuli" moqmedeba igive msaxiobis mier sasceno moedanze grZeldeboda da piriqiT. Teatraluri warmodgenis saerTo struqturasTan organulad Serwymuli kadrebi moqmedebis xSir cvlasTan dakavSirebiT warmoqmnili problemebis daZlevis efeqtur saSualebas warmoadgenda. vs. meierholdis da e. piskatoris TaosnobiT ganxorcielebul speqtaklebSi _ "dedamiwa yalyze" (mxatvari l. popova), "iZlevi evropas" (i. Slepianovi), "ruseTis dRe", "miuxedavad yvelafrisa"(d. hartfildi), "mZvinvare nakadi" (e. zuri), "hopla, Cven vcocxlobT!" (t. miuleri), ekranze agitaciuri Sinaarsis lozungebis, politikuri plakatebis, mowodebebis, titrebis, dokumenturi, qronikaluri kadrebis da mokle filmebis proeqcireba xdeboda. revoluciuri moZraobis progresuli xasiaTis xazgasmis, piesis ideis ganzogadebis mizniT, nawarmoebSi aRwerili konkretuli faqtebi montaJis xerxis meSveobiT msoflio mniSvnelobis movlenebis fonze iyo gaSuqebuli. k. marjaniSvilis xelmZRvanelobiT d. kakabaZis da el. axvledianis mier gaformebul speqtaklebSi proeqciul saSualebebs gansxvavebuli Sinaarsobrivi datvirTva hqonda miniWebuli. piesebis agitaciuri mimarTulebis xazgasma da politikuri ideebis propaganda maTTvis TviTmizans ar warmoadgenda. ganyenebuli Sinaarsis vizualuri masalis demonstrirebis nacvlad, ekranze proeqcirebuli kadrebi uSualod iyo

106

modernizmi saqarTveloSi

dakavSirebuli konkretul dramaturgiul nawarmoebSi aRweril faqtebTan da sivrcobrivi problemebis daZlevis, piesis fabuliT gaTvaliswinebuli mniSvnelovani movlenebis xazgasmis da speqtaklis mxatvruli iersaxis gamdidrebis metyvel da efeqtur xerxs warmoadgenda.

Tea uruSaZe

iv. javaxiSvilis sax. Tbilisis saxelmwifo universiteti. saqarTvelo konstruqtivizmis Tavisebureba qarTul Teatralur-dekoraciul xelovnebaSi XX saukunis dasawyisSi istoriulma movlenebma, dramaturgiaSi mimdinare procesebma, reJisorisa da mxatvris urTierTTanamSromlobis axalma principebma ganapiroba sasceno sivrceSi gansxvavebuli stilis dekoraciuli sistemebis aRmoceneba. am periodSi msoflio xelovnebaSi avangardistuli mimdinareoba ikidebs fexs. avangardizms ver ascda scenografiac da TeatrSi axali gamomsaxvelobiTi esTetikis Camoyalibebas Seuwyo xeli. am TvalsazrisiT dekoraciuli xelovnebis istoriaSi yuradsaReb monakveTs warmoadgens konstruqtivizmi, romelic saerTo movlenaa im drois sabWoTa dekoraciul xelovnebaSi. konstruqtivizmi gaformebis or ZiriTad princips ayalibebs: pirveli - es aris erTiani danadgari, romelic mTeli warmodgenis ganmavlobaSi ar icvleba, meore ki, gaxlavT funqcionaluri scenografia. es principi iTvaliswinebs ZiriTad konstruqciasTan mibmuli moZravi elementebis funqcionalur datvirTvas. funqcionaluri scenografia gaformebis kompoziciur erTianobas warmoadgens. amgvari konstruqciis TiToeuli elementi emsaxureba, rogorc dramaturgiuli masalis "ambis" Txrobas, aseve misi plastikuri formis Seqmnas. amasTan erTad konstruqtivizmi gaformebis dazgur princips uaryofda. aqedan gamomdinare, man mniSvnelovani roli Seasrula sasceno sivrcis ganaxlebis procesSi da sxvadasxva Teatris scenaze, kerZod saqarTveloSic, gansxvavebuli xelweriT gamovlinda. qarTuli dekoraciuli xelovnebis saTaveebTan mdgomma mxatvrebma konstruqtivizmis mniSvnelovani mxareebi ostaturad gamoiyenes da Taviseburad ganaviTares: sasceno sivrcis reorganizacia, Casmuli danadgarebis funqcionaloba, sasceno iatakis aSlis principi, metyveli pirobiToba, feris da Suqis intensiuri qmedeba, saxviTi enis lakonizmi da, rac metad mniSvnelovania, gaformebis am sistemas istoriuli konkretuloba da Sinaarsobrioba SesZines. konstruqtivizmis ganviTarebam mTlianad Secvala sagnobrivi sivrce, Seqmna axali garemo, samyaros axleburi xedva daamkvidra. im drois mignebebma, mravali stilis matarebeli niSnebis warmoqmnam, maT mxatvrul formebSi transformaciam is Rrma ideuri safuZveli Seqmna, ramac Semdgom wlebSi sabolood ganapiroba qarTuli Teqtralurdekoraciuli xelovnebis saxe. gazrdili interesi 1920-30-ian wlebSi momuSave Teatraluri mxatvrebis namuSevrebisadmi gamowveulia im mniSvnelovani faqtiT, rom qarTul scenografiaSi misi ganviTarebis procesSi, konstruqtivizmis ideebs gansxvavebuli midgomiT da datvirTviT yovelTvis vxvdebiT da dResac mas aqvs ganviTarebis Taviseburi saxe da perspeqtiva.

107

I I I S E C T I ON

M O D E R N I S M IN G EORG IA

Gaston Buachidze

de l'Académie de Bretagne et des Pays de la Loir., France Georgian Painting in European Context: Niko Pirosmani, Lado Gudiashvili, David Kakabadze Together with Kiril and Ilia Zdanevichs, the artist of a French origin - Michel Le Dantu participates in "discovery" of Pirosmani. Pirosmani's artworks are exhibited in Paris (initiated by Andre Malaux) and in 1999, in Nantes, where the high quality catalogue was published. This event was followed by the wide reception in French Media. Le Dantu, Louis Aragon and other art critics compared Pirosmani to Giotto. Picasso paints the Portrait of Pirosmani. The "actress Margarita" is said to visit Pirosmani's Exhibition in Paris to see her own portrait. In 1920s David Kakabadze and Lado Gudiashvili enter the "The school of Paris" and participate in many exhibitions. In 1925 Maurice Raynal dedicates his monograph to L. Gudiashvili. The latter is compared with F. Goya's "Caprices". L. Gudiashvili meets Japanese Foujita, Italian Modigliani and Polish Walishewski (Gudiashvili shares his memories of three of them to me). In 1997 Gudiashvili's exhibition is held in Paris, in National Assemble, followed by the publication of catalogue. David Kakabadze publishes two of his Georgian papers in Paris (Paris, 1920-1923; "The art and the space", Paris, 1924-25) and one book in French ("Regarding the constructivist picture", Chene Vert edition). In 1973 Michel Seuphor shares his memories to me and discusses the art of D. Kakabadze. While elaborating his conception on art, D. Kakabadze "leans" toward the art of Leonardo de Vinci. In 1982 the collective catalogue - "avant-garde in Tbilisi", published by Luigi Magarotto and his colleagues in Venice, concerns L. Gudiashvili and D. Kakabadze. The landscapes of D. Kakabadze encompass the space between his homeland - Imereti and Bretagne. According to the words of D. Kakabadze the authentic national art contributes in creation of a universal art.

Gogi Khoshtaria

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection. Georgia Binary Opposition in Niko Pirosmanashvili's Works and Modernist Art Niko Pirosmanashvili's painting system contains structural features which are inherent to contemporary art. This has been suggested by researchers of his art, including I. Zdanevich and V. Kuznetsov, but without providing an in-depth analysis of this phenomenon. One of the most essential characteristics of Modernism, as an epoch-making phenomenon, was the revised perception of artistic unity through more polarized binary oppositions. Various art schools, movements with methodological principles of their own and individuals have been interpreting the problem with different degrees of complexity. The deep insight into the essence of this artistic problem as well as its perfect solution offered by Niko Pirosmanashvili is immensely interesting and difficult to explain at the same time. Having reconsidered the fundamental essence of binary oppositions--namely the fact that any picture as a work of art represents a convergence of two semiotic planes into a single sign and the respective transfer of a dynamic, borderless three-dimensional world into the material two-dimensional limited space-- contemporary art further increases the opposition and attempts to achieve artistic unity of a new type. Stages and movements of contemporary art are mainly defined by the level of insight taken into the aforementioned problem. The works by E. Delacroix, Impressionists and, especially, P. Cezanne were epoch-making in this regard. Strangely enough, Pirosmanashvili's art was shaped during the period (18801890s) when P. Cezanne culminated his artistic endeavors. What is especially difficult to explain is that Pirosmanashvili had no connection with Paris or the French school of painting. At that time in Georgia, only early steps were made in the development of realist easel painting, and it was not until the early 1900s that

109

M O D E R N I S M IN G EORG IA

signs of contemporary art emerged. However, it is in Pirosmanashvili's paintings dating from the 1900s that we see artistic solutions which are normally achieved at the end of an artist's evolutionary path rather than at the beginning of it. In Pirosmanashvili's art, extremely laconic rendering is one of the key organizing principles applied in addressing the controversies faced, and this can be evidenced by his paintings created well before the works of the artists of Paris school.

Liana Antelava

Tbilisi State Academy of Art. Georgia Continual Model of the Universal Space/Time in Georgian Paintings Painting is traditionally attributed to spatial arts. However, it is also without doubt that everything that exists has a temporal dimension. A specific feature of time is that it is not subject to perception. Being non-sensorial, the image of time is closely linked to and defined by metaphors (through which the nonsensorial is modeled). Thus in painting, traditionally articulated as spatial art, time manifests itself through metaphor. Connection with space is inherent to time. It is therefore natural that time can be explained through features characteristic of space. Space and time are "bearing structures" of the image of the world known to us. The correlation between space and time reflects the vision/perception of the outside world. The continuum of space and time accumulates basic phenomenal features of a given culture, epoch, style, and artist. The study of these features shall demonstrate the individual character of a given culture. The presentation will address this issue by presenting works by Niko Pirosmanashvili and Davit Kakabadze.

Marina Medzmariashvili

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection.Georgia Pirosmani's Art in the Framework of European Modernism This paper addresses self taught artist Niko Pirosmani and modernism in Western Europe and Russia. The paper discusses some aspects of Pirosmani's art as the first signs of modernism in Georgia. Pirosmani had not received any professional education and represented the member of Tiflis' lowest levels of society, thus his art reflected his feelings but not any knowledge. Pirosmani's original art created issues, which were new to Western Europe and Russia in the first years of XX century, but were unknown in Georgia. Pirosmani's works are also successful in a very specific, artistic way - that is how they dealt with space, color and shape. The same problems at the same time were raised in the Russian, French and German artistic world. The lecture compares Pirosmani's works with the paintings of H.Russo, P. Picasso, N. Goncharova, M. Chagall, A. Macke and others. The lecture points at the influence of Pirosmani's art on Russian "neo-primitivism" and other areas of avant-garde art. Russian artists M. Ledantu and M. Shevchenko created remakes of Pirosmani's works, an issue almost untouched until today. Though, some of the works of these Russian painters were known to public, they were never reviewed as remakes. We would like to stress the role of the leaders of Russian avant-garde, including M. Ledantu, and of futurists, such as Iliazd and Kiril Zdanevich, in the discovery of Pirosmani and introduction of his works to Georgia, Russia and France (in 1972 year Picasso created Pirosmani's portrait). Pirosmani's phenomenon lays in the natural sublimation of artistic ideas from East and West, in the national and international trends in art, and in the combination of folklore and modernism.

110

MO D E R N I S M IN G EORG IA

Nana Kipiani

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection.Georgia "Poetically Abides a Man" Early 20th century Modernism in Georgian fine arts and literature, which is also referred to as "Tbilisian Modernism," is the most liberal in its essence and yet, the most tragic, of all trends in modern and recent history of Georgian culture. The goal of the paper is to address the national identity of Tbilisian Modernism, which can be traced in the visual and verbal texts of this movement and in the presence of liberal cultural and artistic perception. The problem of identity is relevant, considering the tragic fate of Georgian Modernism. With only a two-decade existence (from 1910 to the late 1920s), it failed to establish even a small niche of its own in the realm of international/western Modernism. This is mainly due to the political and cultural circumstances: Following Sovietization in the 1930s, modernist art, including even Russian revolutionary avant-garde art, suffered repression. Along with that, after the 1921 annexation, the culture of Georgia became marginal as a result of severe restrictions on art and a sweeping movement towards a common cultural and aesthetic space. The ban of Modernism, which occurred simultaneously with the marginalization of national cultures by the Soviet culture policy, has totally erased from memory artistic life of the early 20th century Georgia. It is only now that scholars have begun to assess the historical and artistic importance of this phenomenon and, moreover, started to trace, describe and register its factual material. One obstacle in interpreting the works of modernist artists is their improper affiliation to various movements: the work of the modernist artists of the 1910-20s, who had escaped the Soviet repressions, were, for obvious reasons, considered as a product of certain infatuation and their "repressed" art, created in the Soviet period, was presented as an evolutionary and transitional phenomenon, which was thus placed within the borders of Socialist Realism. The situation has changed, but nevertheless, the two settings, that of Modernism and Socialism/Communism, have been demarcated neither conceptually nor contextually. The latter, however, is essential for the rehabilitation of Tbilisian Modernism and for the definition of its artistic and historical significance on one hand, and for the dismantling of the still surviving cultural and artistic hierarchy established by the Soviet system on the other. This paper raises another problem in the context of identity, namely the category of space, and will respond the following related questions: which space is valuable for Tbilisian Modernism and what value does it have in the modernist context of the correlation between time and space? The specific character of the interpretation reflects a peculiarity of Tbilisian Modernism. The speech also makes use of comparative analysis with i) contemporary western and Russian material and ii) medieval Georgian architecture and mural painting. Samples of medieval European as well Byzantine architecture and painting will be used

Anna Shanshiashivili

Georgian Arts and Culture Centre.I. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University. Georgia The Painting of Niko Pirosmani in the Context of Late 19th -Early 20th c. European Art The paintings of Niko Pirosmani, some of the most significant representations of Georgian fine art, unveil traits, which link him to different artistic movements of late 19th - early 20th century European art. Known as a self-taught artist, Pirosmani is often interpreted as a "Naive" or "Primitive" painter; however, the majority of scholars acknowledge a particular depth and comprehensiveness that distinguish Georgian painter from other naives. The fact that Pirosmani independently and intuitionally came to the key principals of modern painting, elaborated by different painting schools and artistic movements in contemporane111

M O D E R N I S M IN G EORG IA

ous Europe, gives greater importance to his work. Pirosmani is distinguished by a unique, intuitive, inherited sense of the simultaneous comprehension of the whole and the detail, principal and secondary. In order to represent his subjects in a greater context, the painter often neglects details, thus transforming the subject of his painting into a monumental and even "abstract" imagery. This principle connects him to different artistic movements of European modernism. It's widely known that the desire to "pure plastic" and to achieve simplicity of form became one of the major issues of modern painting. Central to these tenets was the exploration of essence, revealed through the neglect of superfluous details in order not to encroach upon the essential elements and alteration or simplification of natural forms instead of their naturalistic depiction. These principles form a basis for the majority of artistic movements of modern art, such as Expressionism, Cubism, Abstractionism and etc. Moreover, Pirosmani's free, quick manner of painting and use of wide brushstrokes resemble the styles of Paul Cézanne, Henri Matisse and Andre Derain. Furthermore, Cézanne used white canvas in the same manner as Pirosmani - with a black oilcloth; when he needed black colour, he simply left that part bare. The symbolic meanings attributed to different colours by Pirosmani are another feature that relates his painting to Post-Impressionism, Symbolism and Abstractionism, whereas the incorporation of inscriptions as an independent compositional element in the picture plain associates the Georgian painter to the art of Cubists, who did the same in 1911. Such qualities as a free manner of painting, simplicity of composition and pictorial means, symbolic language of colors and, finally, the use of inscriptions in composition help to establish Pirosmani amongst the greatest artists of modernism.

Nestan Tatarashvili

Freelance Scholar. Georgia European Cultural Heritage - Art Nouveau Architecture in Georgia The late 19th century saw the emergence of a new style in Europe, referred to as Modern in Georgia, which spread quickly in various countries, including in Georgia, under names as diverse as Art Nouveau, Jugendstil, Secession, Modernista, Liberty, etc. Unlike other styles, Art Nouveau refused to follow preliminarily established forms. It rejected mechanical repetition and promoted free improvisation with ideas and themes, which Georgian artists also accomplished successfully. Art Nouevau architecture was built not only in the capital city of Tbilisi, but in other smaller cities and towns, such as Sokhumi, Batumi, Poti, Kutaisi, Gagra. Akhali Atoni, Kobuleti and Dusheti. Apart from being used as residential and tenement houses, Art Nouveau buildings also were used for banks, schools, shops, hospitals, workshops, theatres and an oranjerie. Of particular note are a tobacco plant and a thermal power station in Tbilisi, as well as a library and a shed for horse-drawn carriages in Poti, all designed in Art Nouveau. Brilliant memorial monuments survive in old, historical cemeteries. Mention must be made of Art Nouveau cinema houses. It is well-known that the dates of the emergence and spread of Art Nouveau and the cinema are almost identical, and it is therefore important that the convergence of these two innovations was such a success in Georgia. Regrettably, there is still much to be done to reveal Art Nouveau buildings and complete related archival studies. The material available, however, attests that the renewed cultural and economic relations with Europe allowed Georgia to adopt and promote Art Nouveau - the most popular trend in architecture at the time. Art Nouveau must be duly addressed not only in Georgian scholarly papers, but also in school textbooks and tourist itineraries. Georgian Art Nouveau architecture has recently drawn the attention of various internationally acknowledged organizations such as the World Monuments Fund in New York, Reseau Art Nouveau Network in Bruxelle and Art Nouveau European Route in Barcelona. As a result, Georgian Art Nouveau heritage is now represented on their websites as well as in numerous international publications.

112

MO D E R N I S M IN G EORG IA

Georgian Art Nouveau - part of the European cultural heritage - has been duly evaluated by Europe. Now it is our turn as Art Nouveau still lacks appreciation and protection; protection from deterioration as well as from wrong and scientifically non-justified restoration efforts, the number of which has increased over the last years.

Maia Tsitsishvili

I. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University. Georgia From Expressionism to Dada: Georgian Painting from 1910 to the 1930s (Based on Recent Discoveries) During recent years everyone who has ever been in touch with the 1910-1930s Georgian avant-garde movement was so surprised to find the hidden acuity, simplicity, diversity and uniqueness of previously unknown material (owing to the existing political situation), that the discovery of these qualities were partly referred to as a fortuity. These traits, which to some degree distinguish Georgian painting of the first half of 20th century from its contemporaneous European art, are observable during the entire course of its existence. The art of this period (painting, graphic, and theatrical stage design, as well as book illumination) reflects nearly all artistic movements of the European avant-garde. During the first half of 20th century, when many European cities overflowed with the avant-garde spirit, Tbilisi - with a peculiar openness and readiness to absorb new ideas was also incorporated into this contemporaneous progressive movement. One may say that Georgian painting evolved most naturally during this period between 1910 and 1920s. It is noteworthy, that every single painter had an individual approach to the avant-garde art: some of them followed just one or two artistic trends (Sh. Kikodze, V. Sidamon-Eristavi, K. Zdanevich, I. Zdanevich, E. Akhvlediani, D. Tavadze); others were engaged in analyzing and developing many different movements (D. Kakabadze, L. Gudiashvili, I. Gamrekeli, D. Shevardnadze); and the works of some Georgian modernists are so unique that it is difficult to find their direct analogues (P. Otskheli). The presentation to the public at large and analysis of these bold and in some cases extremely avantgarde works, which were discovered during the last three years, will contribute to fully recognizing the importance of Georgian modernists and help to change already established views on their work. Although the process of exploration of this unknown material is ongoing, already unveiled artworks that are at once unexpected and remarkable offer the possibility for recapitulation and analysis.

Irine Abesadze

Shota Rustaveli Theatre and Cinema University. Georgia From Georgian Modernism to Transavantgardism, a Definition of Terms The sharply pronounced negation in the perception of the outside world, as provoked by world wars and revolutions, one after another, gave birth to artistic movements which were united under the name of "modernism". The followers of this movement attempted to convey the sense of homelessness and alienation of the humans and the fear of totalitarian violence in various forms. The painful perception of the anticipated tragic end of the universe and eschatological visions reached their apex in the 1960-70s, when renowned culturologists and philosophers began asserting, independently from each other, that the life could not go on the same way. It is as a result that the greatest philosopher of the 20th century, M. Heidegger, is considered one of the forefathers of not only Existentialism, but Postmodernism as well. To him belong the following words: "Postmodernism originated to add new notion to the world rather than to finish off the trend of Modernism." It is too early to discuss artistic processes taking place in the 1980-1990s in the Georgian cultural milieu as their conceptual formation is still underway. Today it is only possible to state the trends in evidence: i)

113

M O D E R N I S M IN G EORG IA

the establishment of Neo-figurativism in contrast to non-figurativeness of abstract art; ii) the extensive use of artistic devices, such as grotesqueness and irony; iii) the establishment of the style of eclecticism and inter-textualism; iv) the presence of religious and mythological motivations; v) nostalgia of historical past; and vi) double coding. The terms "Modernism" and "Avant-gardism", as well as "Postmodernism" and "Transavant-garde", which came after, are often interchangeably used in scholarly literature due to their compatible nature and essential similarities. Therefore it seems more reasonable to agree on which definitions are more applicable to the Georgian artistic milieu in order not to confuse unaware recipients. The terms "Postmodernism" was first applied in respect to cultural trends in the 1980s by the French philosopher J. Baudrillard and later by P. Portogezi in the 1980-1990s in relation to architecture. The term "Transavantgarde" was supported by another Italian professor B. Oliva, who first published the Transavantgarde concept of art development. Therefore it is more appropriate to use the term "Transavantgarde" to explain this movement. What is clear though is that whatever term is selected to denote the 1980s' artistic trends, the creative and intellectual context of Georgia, having found itself in the Soviet space, spontaneously reacted by saturating Georgian fine art with Transavantgarde elements. The grounds for this had been prepared by early 20th century avantgarde art.

Tea Tabatadze

Tbilisi State Academy of Art Georgia. Georgia Towards the Definition of Certain Characteristics of Modernist Artistyle Cafes - Conceptual Aspect of the Kimerioni Wall Paintings The artistic cabaret/club/café is a notable phenomenon of early Modernism. It was at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century that the cabaret movement, cabaret style and "café culture" became relevant in Europe and Russia. The analysis of the related literature suggests that the establishment of artistic cabarets/clubs/cafés was facilitated by a combination of cultural, aesthetic (modernist context), political, and social circumstances in the country, as well as because of the psychological disposition of the public. A shared public consciousness created the need, desire and grounds for this unity and defined the chronology, nature of the function of these establishments and their social and aesthetic purpose to the public. Therefore, artistic cabarets in all countries and cities had their own, distinctive context, their own "theme". Tbilisi of the 1910s had the right context for the "cabaret epidemic". The tradition of artistic cafés and clubs was imported from Russia. Apart from Georgians, they were founded by modernists of various nationalities living in Tbilisi at the time. The tradition of adorning cafés with murals also came from Russia. But despite Russian influence, the differing functions of these establishments attest to the fact that they were natural and logical elements of the Tbilisi cultural milieu, which, in its turn, suggests that Georgian culture of the time contributed towards the unified modernist discourse. Though influenced by the spiritual, aesthetic/ethical aspirations from which they emerged, Tbilisi's artistic cafés, and the Kimerioni in particular, had a distinctive character that was their own. This was defined by the following factors: I) historical and political settings (the years of national independence); II) Tbilisi itself - its character, its way of life; III) the nature of the modernist culture and art: its multi- or international character; the main aesthetic object of the Georgian artists of the time - "national and universal" - which defined the function of art and its relation to the country; and the unanimous understanding of the society during this period of this relationship. Kimerioni is a synthetic structure - a functional space adorned with murals containing historical, time and social references and depicting the world outlook and aspirations of early 20th century Tbilisi through the aesthetic form. In this regard, the Kimerioni presents a shared artistic system, though this unity is represented by three individual artists (L. Gudiashvili, D. Kakabadze and S. Sudeyikin), three subjective visions, three distinctive themes, and two distinct cultures.

114

MO D E R N I S M IN G EORG IA

Mzia Chikhradze

G. Chubinashvili National Center of Georgian Art History and Monuments Protection.Georgia Futurist Book, Tbilisi 1917-1919 The paper touches on one of the most important artistic occurrence of cultural life of Tbilisi - the futurist books issued in 1910-1920ies, which was a good example of intercultural, international cooperation of artists and literary men. In the work there are overviewed the preconditions of the above mentioned phenomenon, i.e. it is done the short survey of the artistic-cultural life of Tbilisi of that period. In the work there is observed the modern art movement futurism and very important part of that movement the futurist books. There is done the comprehensive analysis of European (Italian) and Russian futurism, it is surveyed Italian futurist book and in this connection other artistic phenomenon, which plaid an essential role in founding and development of Modernism and particularly, futurist book. There is stressed the role of the founder of the movement Fillipo Thomaso Marinetti in establishing of futurism and futurist book there. It is also presented the theoretical basing to his futurist philosophy. The special place is given to the analysis of Russian futurist books, which were issued in Moscow and Petersburg in 1910s, those books greatly promoted the arising of Tbilisi futurist books. It is done the parallel analysis of Russian and Tbilisi futurist books and also it is revealed the common and the specific characteristics of Tbilisi Futurist book. In the work there is marked out the figure of the poet Ilia Zdanevich and his importance for the development of Georgian Modernism, it is underlined his contribution to futurist art and establishment of Dadaism in 1910s in Tbilisi. It is considered the publishing activity of futurist organization "410" in 1917-1919, which was a very important event in cultural life of Tbilisi of that period. The organization under the leadership of Kruchonikh, Terenteev, Ilia and Kirill Zdanevich and Valishevski published many interesting books inn different publishing houses of Tbilisi, those were republished futurist books which have been issued in Moscow and Petersburg in 1912-1913. The special place is given to the collection dedicated to the artists Sophia Melnikova, that book became a real anthology of futurist literature. The collection was issued in 1919 and it is considered as the important attainment not only of Georgian and Russian, but also Modern European book design art. As a conclusion it is marked out the significance of the futurist books published in 1910-1920ies in Tbilisi and it is shown the importance of that artistic event for founding and development of Georgian Modernism in general and particularly, advancing the art of futurist book.

Nino Zaalishvili

Tbilisi State Academy of Art. Georgia Several Trends in Georgian Graphic Art of the 1920s and 1930s The search for self-identification, launched earlier with simple quotations from Georgian works of art, was continued in the 20th century by creative reproduction of the impulses received. This was not, however, the only pursuit of artists of the time. They took equal interest in European and oriental arts. Art Nouveau then became particularly relevant, and works by also A. Beardsley fell into focus to some extent. In Georgia, this style retained its influence for a period longer than in Europe. This was facilitated by creative and pedagogical activities of E. Lansere and I. Scharleman who had fled Petersburg and worked at the Academy of Art established in 1922. A wide range of avant-garde movements gained popularity between 1918 and 1921 as a result of contact

115

M O D E R N I S M IN G EORG IA

with Russian artists who had emigrated to an independent Georgia. Expressionist and constructivist works by I. Gamrekeli, B. Gordesiani, K. Zdanevich and E. Lalaeva were featured in Georgian book and magazines and on leafs of paper. The works of some graphic artists (L. Grigolia) reflect the style of a number of popular European artists (F. Vallaton and F. Masereel). The graphical paper leafs by the stage designer Petre Otskheli are reminiscent of A. Beardsley, L. Baxt and G. Klimt. The ideological suppression in the 1930s had a negative impact on Georgian graphic art: numerous graphic artists, including K. Kwees, K. Gritsai, I. Stennberg, had to quit, while P. Otskheli was executed. In the period during and after the 1930s, the graphic artists L. Gudiashvili and S. Gabashvili proceeded with their attempts to synthesize European and oriental art with Georgian art in their illustrations and easel graphics. Slightly different was the style in which S. Kobuladze worked; he emphasized the interpretation of Renaissance art, though in his final years the artist took interest in Picasso's Neo-Greek style. Continuing the spirit of the 1920-30s, following generations of the best Georgian graphic artists have opted to engage in a cultural dialogue and to achieve inclusion of national art into processes unfolding on the international artistic arena.

Ketevan Shavgulidze

Tbilisi State Academy of Art. Georgia The Principle of Montage in Georgian Stage Design (1920s) The works of innovative stage producers and designers during the 1920s was marked by the use of the principles of montage and by specific cinematographic techniques. On the Russian stage, a screen was included into the common system of settings by V. Meyerhold, which became an effective means of artistic propaganda. Avant-garde drama experiments performed by E. Piscator and Dadaist artists in the field of projective decoration in Germany was an important novelty for the international theatrical world. In the late 1920s, Georgian stage designers, in their search for new principles of space organization, took interest in innovative cinematographic techniques. The first attempt made in this regard was D. Kakabadze's stage design for the play Hoppla, We're Alive (the first performance held at the Kutaisi-Batumi State Drama Theatre, which was founded by K. Marjanishvili in 1928). This was followed by interesting stage sets created by E. Akhvlediani for How?, An Old Enthusiast, Khatije. The decorative system of these performances included specific cinematographic facilities, such as a screen and projective equipment. Specially made film shots were shown on the screen to develop and continue stage acts. The action "started" by an actor in the film shot would continue by the same actor on the stage and the other way round. Harmoniously merging with the overall structure of the drama performance, the shots were an effective means of overcoming problems resulting from frequent changing of acts. The performances staged by V. Meyerhold and E. Piscator - The Earth Upside Down (stage designer L. Popova), Giving Europe (I. Shlepyanov), Russian Day, Despite Everything (D. Hatfield), Raging Current (E. Zur), and Hoppla, We're Alive (T. Muller), featured a screen projecting propaganda slogans, political posters, appeals, subtitles, documental shots and short films. To highlight the progressive nature of the revolutionary movement and to generalize the idea of the play, specific facts described were, through the use of montage technique, displayed against the background of the events of universal relevance. Different was the conceptual function of projections used in the performances under K. Marjanishvili and by D. Kakabadze and E. Akhvlediani's direction. The emphasis on the agitation and propaganda of political ideas was not a self-goal. Instead of demonstrating abstract visual material, the projected shots were linked to the facts described and served to overcome spatial problems. They were an expressive and effective means of underlining the important events in the plot of the play.

116

MO D E R N I S M IN G EORG IA

Tea Urushadze

I. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University. Georgia Peculiarity of Constructivism in Georgian Stage Design The historical circumstances coupled with the processes unfolding in the dramatic arts and the emerging principles of director-artist cooperation in the early 20th century contributed to the development of decorative systems of a new style of stage design. World art at the time was marked by the advancement of the avant-garde movement. This movement affected stage design by fostering the development of expressive theatre aesthetics. It was also connected to Constructivism, which characterized the Soviet art of the period and provides an interesting segment of the history of decorative art. The concept of constructivist stage design rests on two major principles. It implies the presence of a monolithic structure throughout a performance and functional scenography. The latter implies giving functional importance to adjustable elements attached to the main structure. Functional scenography builds on the compositional unity of the design. Each element of such structure adds to the "narration" of dramatic materials and formation of its plastic form. Constructivism also rejected the use of easel painting. It thus played an important role in the renewal of stage art and found different manifestations on various stages throughout Georgia. The artists who were at the root of Georgian decorative art took advantage of Constructivism and developed it in their own way by reorganizing the stage space, adding functionality to installed structures and introducing the principles of a disordering stage floor, expressive conventionality, an intensive use of color and light, laconism of expressive vocabulary and, most importantly, historical specificity and meaningful content to this system of design. The development of Constructivism brought about an extensive change to "object space" and contributed to the establishment of a new environment and to the creation of new world outlook. The solutions found at that time, as well as the emergence of features characterized by a mixture of styles and their transformation into artistic forms set conceptual grounds which shaped the image of Georgian decorative art in the years to come. The growing interest in the works of stage designers active in the 1920s-30s is largely due to the Constructivist ideas that manifested in different ways in the history of Georgian stage design, and which still have a distinctive image and perspectives for further development.

117

sastendo moxsenebebi / Poster Presentations

TaTia Rvineria. Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia. saqarTvelo elene axvledianis Semoqmedebis ucnobi aspeqti (parizuli periodis studiur Canaxatebze dayrdnobiT) Tatia Ghvineria. Tbilisi State Academy of Art. Georgia The Unknown Aspect of the Art of Elene Akhvlediani (Based on The Studio Sketches of Parisian Period) naTia ebanoiZe. Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia. saqarTvelo organuli formis sakiTxi Salva qiqoZisa da elene axvledianis SemoqmedebaSi Natia Ebanoidze. Tbilisi State Academy of Art. Georgia The Issue of Organic Form in the Art of Shalva Kikodze and Elene Akhvlediani

qeTevan cecxlaZe. Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia. saqarTvelo qarTuli modernizmi -tradicia da Tanamedroveoba Ketevan Tsetskhladze. Tbilisi State Academy of Art. Georgia Georgian Modernism -Tradition and Contemporariness

qrinstine darCia. Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia. saqarTvelo klara kveesis Semoqmedeba (XX saukunis 20-iani wlebis qarTuli ferweris ucnobi furceli) Kristine Darchia. Tbilisi State Academy of Art.Georgia The Art of Clara Kvees (The Unknown Page of Georgian Painting of 1920s)

118

I V seqcia

restavracia/konservacia

biodazianebebi kulturul memkvidreobaSi

restavracia/konservacia

maia SaviSvili

saqarTvelos kulturis, ZeglTa dacvisa da sportis saministro. saqarTvelo sarestavracio saqmianobis zogadi mimoxilva ukanasknel periodSi siZveleTa dacvisa da kulturuli memkvidreobis nimuSTa restavracia-reabilitaciis procesi saministros mier sul ufro da ufro aqtiurad imarTeba. dargi viTardeba multidisciplinarul kvlevebsa da saerTaSoriso gamocdilebaze dayrdnobiT, risTvisac saministros mier mimdinareobs saqmianoba mravali mimarTulebiT - xorcieldeba "unikalur ZeglTa gadarCenis saxelmwifo programa", romlis farglebSic restavrirebul iqna kedlis mxatvrobis, xuroTmoZRvrebis, xelnawerTa Tu sxva saxis asobiT Zegli. gansakuTrebuli yuradReba eqceva, agreTve UNESCO-s Zeglebs; swored amJamad mimdinareobs gelaTis samonastro kompleqsis reabilitaciisa da infrastruqturis mowyobis proeqti, aseve mcxeTis wm. jvris mcire taZris gadaudebeli sareabilitacio samuSaoebi, quTaisis "bagratis" taZris azomviTi da kvleviTi samuSaoebi. dargis ganviTarebisa da swori mimarTulebiT warmarTvis mizniT, saministro TanamSromlobs aseve sxvadasxva fondebTan, romelTa TanadgomiTac dafinansebul iqna iseTi mniSvnelovani specialuri naSromebis Targmna da gamocema, romelTa avtorebic arian i. iukileto, j. kaneva, i. masari, krebuli "xuroTmoZRvrebis konservacia" da sxv. 2004 wels a. quTaTelaZis sax. Tbilisis saxelm. samxatvro akademiis bazaze daarsda saxviTi xelovnebisa da arqiteqturis restavraciis fakulteti, romelic manamde integrirebuli iyo sxva fakultetebTan. aqve Seiqmna diagnostikur-kvleviTi laboratoria, saerTaSoriso standartebiT SemuSavebul iqna specialuri saswavlo programa. yovelive amis Sedegad, gaizarda interesi dargis mimarT, saxelmwifos mxridan yuradRebis mipyrobam sarestavracio saqmianobisadmi, TandaTanobiT gamoiwvia misi popularizacia, gaizarda moTxovnileba da, movida axali Taoba, romelic izrdeba pro-fesionalebis gverdiT. amas garda, saministroSi, integrirebul iqna adre damoukideblad arsebuli ZeglTa dacvis departamentis arqivi, romelSic ganTavsebulia Zeglebze 1920-iani wlebidan dawyebuli da dRes mimdinare saproeqto samuSaoebis amsaxveli masala, romlis nawilic ukve TavisTavad kulturuli memkvidreobis Zegls warmoadgens da xSirad Tanamedrove Carevebis dros fasdaudebel daxmarebas uwevs restavratorebs.

sabina vedovelo

saziaro proeqti

Conservazione Beni Cultural,italia

am moxsenebaSi mimovixilav im xangrZlivi TanamSromlobis istorias, romelic 1996 wels msoflio bankis Italian Trust Fund-is dafinansebiT daiwyo. am gamocdilebam safuZveli Cauyara qarTuli kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebTan dakavSirebuli principuli problemebis gaazrebas, proeqtebis dagegmvasa da sakonservacio sakiTxebis Sesaxeb mosazrebaTa gacvla-gamocvlas. ganxorcielda sami erToblivi proeqti: yincvisSi, timoTesubansa da martvilSi. imasTan erTad, rom yoveli SemTxveva konkretuli Zeglis damaxasiaTebeli problematikis kuTxiT iqna Seswavlili, proeqtebis ganxorcielebam gamokveTa is midgoma, romlis misadagebac sxva SemTxvevebSic SeiZleba. amasTan, unda aRiniSnos, rom adgilobrivi specialistebi xSirad ufro maRali donis profesionalizmiT da damoukidebeli

120

restavracia/konservacia

gadawyvetilebebis miRebis unariT gamoirCeodnen. sami sxvadasxva proeqtis mimoxilva warmoaCens im niuansur gansxvavebebs, ramac SemdgomSi maTi sxavadsxva gziT ganviTareba gamoiwvia, da im sirTuleebs, romelTa winaSec videqiT. aseve warmoaCens im gzas, romelmac sxvadasxva mkacri kriteriumebiT SemuSavebul sakonservacio meTodikamde migviyvana. aRniSnul Zeglebze dadasturebuli biologiuri dazianebebis kvleva udaod yvelaze sainteresoa im problemaTagan, romelTa winaSec mogviwia dadgoma, Tumca ufro zogadi konteqstisaTvis Cven gvsurs aseve ganvixiloT; · restavratorebis, xelovnebaTmcodneebisa da sazogadeobrivi struqturebis TanamSromloba sakonservacio treningebsa da memkvidreobis dacvaSi, diagnostikisa da teqnikuri dokumentaciis sakiTxSi. · sakonservacio sakiTxebTan dakavSirebuli codnis gafarToeba kedlis mxatvrobis udidesi memkvidreobis mqone ori qveynis - saqarTvelosa da italias Soris mWidro TanamSromlobiT. · da bolos, sakonservacio problematikis Seswavlis da samuSaoebis dagegmvis sakiTxSi interdisciplinaruli jgufis TanamSromloba.

erik viurgeri

damoukidebeli mkvlevari. germania istoriuli nagebobebis safuZvlebis gamagrebis axali meTodi kulturul memkvidreobaze da saganZurze zrunva kulturuli eris ZiriTadi maxasiaTebelia. amaSi igulisxmeba istoriuli nagebobebis: eklesiebis, monastrebis, taZrebis, minareTebis da aseve teqnikuri nagebobebis: xidebis, akvedukebis da a.S movla da Senaxva. komerciuli daniSnulebis anu turizmis garda, aseTi istoriuli nagebobebi, upirveles yovlisa, saxelmwifos erovnul identurobas emsaxureba. Senaxvisa da movlis garda, xSirad aucilebeli xdeba am nagebobebis rekonstruqciac. saukuneTa ganmavlobaSi nagebobebi ziandeba ara mxolod meteorologiuri movlenebis, araprofesionaluri minaSenebis an miwisZvrebis Sedegad, aramed sakmaod xSiria saZirkvelis dazianebebic. gruntis wylebis dawevam SeiZleba xis ximinjebiani saZirkvelis lpoba gamoiwvios, ris Sedegadac warmoiqmneba bzarebi. niadagSi warmoiqmneba iseTi araxelsayreli pirobebi, romelnic nagebobis araerTgvarovan jdomas ganapirobebs. amis kargi magaliTia pizis koSki. rogorc wesi, fundamentis rekonstruqcia Zalian rTulia da did xarjebs ukavSirdeba. axali meTodis danergvidan TiTqmis 25 weli gavida. miuxedava imisa, rom igi jer kidev sakmaod Zviria, es meTodi dazianebuli saZirkvlebis rekonstruqciis SedarebiT iol meTods warmoadgens. amis garda, es meTodi imis saSualebasac iZleva, rom fundamenti gruntis wylebis donis qveviTac gamagrdes. axali meTodis mTavari azri isaa, rom mzidi kedlebis qveS arsebuli grunti Tavdapirvelad gaTxevaddes, xolo Semdeg cementis damatebiT miwa-betonad iqces. mas Semdeg, rac vertikaluri burRva niadagisTvis aucilebel siRrmes miaRwevs, burRis Tavidan didi wneviT gamoiSveba wylis Wavli. wylis WavliT burRis garSemo arsebul niadags xsnian da aTxevadeben. burRis milis neli trialiTa da amoweviT cilindruli formis gaTxevadebuli niadagi warmoiqmneba. burRis milis amowevisas meore reaqtiuli mfrqvevanadan cementi gamoiSveba da gruntSi iwnexeba. gaTxevadebuli niadagi cementTan erTad warmoqmnis svetis formis miwa-cementis

121

restavracia/konservacia

sxeuls, romelsac myar gruntze msxvili betonis ximinjiviT SeuZlia nagebobis simZimis zidva. moxsenebaSi aRwerili meTodi, romelsac samSeneblo literaturaSi reaqtiuli Wavlis meTodi anu Jet Grouting-i ewodeba, warmodgenili iqneba avstriasa da xorvatiaSi ganxorcielebuli ramdenime eklesiis rekonstruqciis magaliTze.

mark gitinsi

Conservazione Beni Culturali. italia qarTuli kedlis mxatvrobis sami nimuSis konservaciisadmi meTodologiuri da praqtikuli midgoma moxsenebis mizania ganvixiloT sakonservacio samuSaobi, romlebic 1996-2008 wlebSi saqarTveloSi sam Zeglze, kerZod yincvisis wm. nikolozis da timoTesubnis da martvilis RmrTismSoblis taZrebis moxatulobebis sakonservacio proeqtebis farglebSi ganxorcielda. proeqtebSi CarTuli iyvnen sxvadasxva profesiis qarTveli da ucxoeli specialistebi. sakonservacio samuSaoebis dagegmvisas gaTvaliswinebul iqna zogadi sakonservacio meTodologiis sakiTxebi, iseve, rogorc ufro konkretuli sakiTxebi, romlebic zogadad qarTuli Zeglebis, konkretulad ki, am mxatvrobebis konservaciis specifikasTan iyo dakavSirebuli. magaliTad, aseTi sakiTxia SezRuduli biujeti, romelic gulixmobs, rom prioritetad gamoiyo yvelaze aucilebeli samuSaoebis Catareba, Tumca Tavis mxriv es kargad eTanxmeboda e.w minimaluri Carevis princips, romliTac samuSao jgufis yvela wevri xelmZRvanelobda. aseve, mniSvnelovani iyo fizikuri da qimiuri SeTavsebadobis sakiTxi: magaliTad, is faqti, rom moxatulobaTa umetesi nawili sveli teqnikis nacvlad mSrali teqnikiT aris Sesrulebuli niSnavada imas, rom agresiuli gamwmendi masalis gamoyenebis sakiTxi TavisTavad gamoiricxa. masalis SerCevisas, aseve, gaTvaliswinebuli iyo misi stabiluroba da SemdgomSi freskis dazianebis wyarod qcevis saSiSroebac: magaliTad, mikroorganizmebis gavrcelebis riskis gamo gadawyda ar gamoyenebuliyo aqerclili ferweruli fenis gasamagrebeli tradiciuli saSualeba - kazeini. da bolos, ukanaskneli periodis sakonservacio samuSaoebisas yuradReba mieqca ferweruli fenis danakargis Sevsebisas esTetikur mxaresac, rac erTis mxriv miznad isaxavs, rom freskis dazianeba maqsimalurad naklebad TvalSi sacemi iyos mnaxvelisaTvis, Tumca meores mxriv eyrdnoba "minimaluri Carevis" princips.

nana kupraSvili

Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia. saqarTvelo gelaTis RmrTismSoblis taZris XII saukunis moxatulobaTa teqnika gelaTis mravalricxovan moxatulobaTa Soris qronologiurad yvelaze adreulia XII s-Si Sesrulebuli narTeqsis, samxreT-aRmosavleT egvteris, samxreTi egvteris karibWisa da Crdilo-dasavleT egvteris moxatulobebi. narTeqsis mxatvrobis Seswavlisas yuradRebas iqcevs misi Sesrulebis teqnika. Sua saukuneebis qarTuli kedlis mxatvrobis istoriaSi es nimuSi erT-erTia im mcirericxovan ZeglTagan, romlebic Sereuli teqnikiTaa Sesrulebuli. am moxatulobis

122

restavracia/konservacia

Selesilobis ZiriTadi komponentia kiri, rac aucilebeli pirobaa Sereuli teqnikiT xatvisas. mosamzadebeli naxatisaTvis ZiriTadad gamoyenebulia miwis saRebavebi, xolo sruli saxiT SemorCenil fragmentebze iseTi ZviradRirebuli pigmentebic gvxvdeba, rogoricaa ultramarini, singuri da surinji. gelaTSi SemorCenil moxatulobaTagan qronologiurad momdevno unda iyos samxreT-aRmosavleTi egvteris moxatulobis qveda fena. TinaTin virsalaZe mas XII s-iT aTariRebs da narTeqsis moxatulobis Tanadroulad miiCnevs. es fena egvterSi dRes arsebuli mxatvrobis qvemodan adgil-adgil Cans. es mxatvrobac Sereuli teqnikiTaa Sesrulebuli. fragmentebi mosamzadebeli naxatis donezea SemorCenili. samxreT-aRmosavleTi egvteris moxatulobis pirveli fenisa da narTeqsis mxatvrobis SelesilobaTa analizma gviCvena, rom nalesobani gansxvavdeba, rogorc SemadgenlobiT, aseve, - sisqiT. kidev erTi adreuli moxatulobis Selesilobis kvali SemorCenilia samxreTi egvteris karibWeSi. mxatvrobis kvali aq faqtiurad aRarsad Cans. nalesobis Semadgenloba ki narTeqsis nalesobis Semadgenlobis identuria. nalesobaTa analizis safuZvelze SeiZleba vivaraudoT, rom narTeqsi da samxreTi karibWe erTdroulad moixata XII s-Si, xolo samxreT-aRmosavleTi egvteris pirveli fena odnav mogvianebiT, narTeqsisa da karibWis Semdgom. gelaTis adreuli moxatulobebis jgufSi Sedis Crdilo-dasavleT egvterSi samxreT kedelze, TaRSi mosamzadebeli naxatis doneze SemorCenili sami wminda dedis figura, romlebic Sereuli teqnikiTaa Sesrulebuli. mosamzadebeli naxati aqac wiTeli oqrisaa. mxatvrobis Selesilobis analizma metad saintereso monacemebi gamoavlina: es nalesoba samxreT-aRmosavleTi egvteris pirveli fenis Selesilobis identuria. amgvarad, gelaTis adreul moxatulobaTa Selesilobis analizis Sedegebis safuZvelze SeiZleba vivaraudoT, rom gelaTSi Tavdapirvelad mxatvroba Sesrulda narTeqssa da samxreT karibWeSi (1125-1130 ww.), odnav mogvianebiT ki moixata samxreTaRmosavleTi da Crdilo-dasavleTi egvterebi. am moxatulobaTa zusti TariRis dadgena damatebiT kvlevas moiTxovs.

julia kaneva

romis III universiteti. italia kedlis mxatvrobis biodazianeba martvilis RmrTismSoblis eklesiis kedlis mxatvrobis biologiuri dazianebis kvleva Catarda floristuli da ekologiuri meTodiT. es problema gansakuTrebiT mniSvnelovani iyo eklesiis dasavleT karibWeSi, sadac SeiniSneboda Savi, mwvane da vardisferi fena, rac wyalmcenareebis (Chroococcale) da sxva baqteriuli formebis arsebobam gamoiwvia. es baqteriuli koloniebi Seswavlil iqna optikuri mikroskopis da standartuli eleqtronuli modulis saSualebiT, da gamoikveTa, rom gansxvaveba sxvadasxva fenomenologiebs Soris ZiriTadad raodenobrivia, garda vardisferi patinisa. es ukanaskneli, faqtiurad, sxva baqteriul formebs miekuTvneba, romelic karotenoiduli pigmentebs Seicavs, rac dakavSirebulia ganaTebasTan SedarebiT nakleb tenianobasTan. zogadad, i biodazianebis cvlilebebi kavSirSia sinaTlisa da haeris cirkulaciasTan, gansakuTrebiT teniani haerisa da nislis mimarTulebasTan zamTarSi. masalaTa (samSeneblo xsnari da qva) forianobis da karibWeSi arsebuli gansxvavebuli garemo pirobebis gaTvaliswinebiT, am organizmebisa da maTi, rogorc bioindikatorebis,

123

restavracia/konservacia

gavrcelebis gamoyenebiT, SemuSavebul iqna kedlebis tenianobis donis maCvenebeli ruka. zogierT sakonservacio samuSaos win uswrebda winaswari testi masalis efeqturobaze, kerZod testebi Catarda ori biocidis gamoyenebiT (rocima 110 da preventol R80, oTxmagi amoniumis marilebi, pirvel SemTxvevaSi amas emateba organotinis xsnari), romlebic farTodaa Semowmebuli da gamoyenebuli warsulSi. Zeglis mikroklimaturi pirobebis Sefasebis saSualebiT, SeTavazebul iqna garemo pirobebSi Careva, imisaTvis, raTa SezRudul iqnas am organizmebis zrdis ekologiuri SesaZlebloba da es sakonservacio problema xangrZlivi droiT gadaiWras.

Tomas varSaidi

LBW-Bioconsult. germania biodazianeba kedlis mxatvrobaSi mikroorganizmebis biodamazianebeli efeqtebi istoriul kedlis mxatvrobaSi emyareba nagebobis struqturis (anu tenianoba, temperatura, ventilacia), mocemuli istoriuli masalebis tipis (anu struqtura, Termo-higruli Tvisebebi, kvebiTi efeqti), iseve rogorc mikroflorisa da maTi metaboluri aqtivobis kompoziciis rTul urTierTqmedebas. istoriuli kedlis mxatvrobis dazianeba, ZiriTadad, ganisazRvreba ferweruli fenis forianobiT, mineraluri, Sesabamisad organuli matricis stabilurobiT, nestisa da tenianobis Sewovis unariT, xsnadi marilebis raodenobiT da garemo mikroklimaturi pirobebiT. Sedegad miRebuli damazianebeli procesi xasiaTdeba marilebis kristalizaciiT, gamkvrivebiT da pigmenturi fenebis gaTiSviT, iseve rogorc damangreveli koroziiT, rasac mosdevs moxatuli zedapiris gafxviereba da kedlis moxatulobis struqturis erTianobis saboloo dakargva. aRweril damazianebel formebs xSirad Tan axlavs mikrobuli zegavlena, rogoricaa gamauferulebeli pigmentebis biogenuri zrda (anu qlorofilebi, melaninebi, karotinoidebi), nestis Semwovi, gamkvrivebuli da webovani biofirebis warmoSoba, sokos SeRweva da meqanikuri zewola, fermentuli ieriSi organul safuZvelze (anu istoriuli SemaerTeblebi, sakonservacio konsolidantebi), aseve organuli mJavebis gamoyofa. aq, "seko" moxatulobebi ufro xSirad xdeba biodazianebis msxverpli, vidre "freskuli" mxatvroba, ramdenadac isini gvTavazoben organuli warmoSobis farTo speqtrs (saxamebeli, webo, kazeini, zeTi, kvercxis guli), magram sakuTriv anTropogenul zegavlenebsac SeuZlia xeli Seuwyos mikrobuli dazianebis process organuli wvrili mtveriT gazrdili damtverviT, iseve rogorc polimeris konsolidantebis gamoyenebiT restavraciis procesSi. adgilze arsebuli klimaturi pirobebi sabolood gansazRvraven potenciuri mikrobuli zrdis zomas. imisaTvis raTa gamovlindes Tu ra gavlenas axdens kompleqsuri biodazianeba kedlis mxatvrobaze, winaswari mikrobiologiuri Seswavlis safuZvelze ganxilul iqneba atenis eklesiis magaliTi; saqarTveloSi da evropaSi msgavsi dazianebis mqone Zeglebi.

124

restavracia/konservacia

franCesko imperi

romis III universiteti. italia uZvelesi kedlis mxatvrobis "gavardisfrebis" etiologia: molekuluri midgoma uZvelesi moxatulobis biologiuri dazianebis gamomwvevi mikroorganizmebis aRwera sarestavracio samuSaoebis ganuyofeli nawilia. materaSi (italia) "pirveli codvis" kriptis Sua saukuneebis freskebis "gavardisfrebis" gamomwvevi mikrobi gamokvleul iqna mikroskopuli, molekuluri da stereoskopuli meTodebiT. baqteriuli koloniebi moxatulobis sami sxvadasxva "vardisferi" adgilidan, gamokvleul iqna 16S rRNA genuri meTodebiT. eubaqteriuli kolonizacia ZiriTadad Sedgeboda aqtinobaqteriebisgan, romelTa Soris gamosxivebisadmi mdgradi rubrobaqteria Seadgenda 16S rRNA genetikuri fondis 63-87% erTi sinjisaTvis. arqea, romelSic Warbobs haloarqeas msgavsi biotipebi, aRmoCenil iqna samidan erT adgilze, sadac is Seadgenda mTeli 16S rRNA genetikuri fondis <0.1%. ramanis speqtroskopiam daadgina identuroba R. radioamtan karetenoidebsa (baqterioruberins) da freskaTa feris Secvlis gamomwvev pigmentebs Soris. es kvleva pirveli sabuTia rubrobaqteriismagvari baqterioruberinis warmomqmneli baqteriis dazianebasa da uZvelesi freskebis "gavardisfrebas" Soris kavSirisa.

nino kitovani

saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi. saqarTvelo informacia ubisis didi karedis saTave xatis kvlevisa da konservaciis meTodis Sesaxeb S.amiranaSvilis sax. xelovnebis muzeumSi daculi ubisis RmrTismSoblis xati(seg#657. xmm 225/a; 33x27 sm. xe, tilo, levkasi, furclovani oqro, tempera, Weduroba) XIII saukunis qarTuli xatwerisa da metaloplastikis mniSvnelovani nimuSi, ubisis monastris saganZuris nawilia da warmoadgens misTvis sagangebod Seqmnili didi karedis saTave xats. igi ubisidan ukve Zlier dazianebuli, seg-Si 1925 wels Camoitanes eklesiis sxva ferwerul xatebTan erTad. saq. xelovnebis muzeumSi 1952w-dan inaxeba dRes xati nawilebadaa daSlili. esenia: Suaze gaxeTqili dafa, tilo masze Sesrulebuli ferweriT da Weduri dekoris mooqrovili vercxlis firfitebi. amjerad vexebiT mxolod ferweris, xisa da tilos safuZvlis mdgomareobas da maT kvlevasa da konservaciis meTodikas. saxezea Zeglis struqturuli elementebis Semadgeneli organuli Tu araorganuli masalebis kompleqsuri dazianeba. aris rogorc qimiuri cvlilebebi, aseve dakargulia maTi meqanikuri mdgradoba, rac saukuneebis manZilze nestisa da bioagentebis zemoqmedebis Sedegia. daSlilia Semkvreli nivTierebebi, levkasisa da ferweris fenis Sinagani SeWiduloba (koezia) Zlier daqveiTebulia, aseve dakargulia fenebis erTmaneTTan mikvris (adgeziis) unari. ferwera naklulia. gansakuTrebiT fragmentulia Wedurobis qveS moxvedrili monakveTebi. WianWami, dafqviluli da naklulia dafa, gamyifebuli da naklulia tilo. daSlilia agreTeve is weboc, romelic Tavis droze gamouyenebiaT ferweris zedapirze qaRaldis misakravad. konservaciis meTodikis gansazRvrisaTvis, agreTve qarTuli xatweris teqnikisa da teqnologiis ukeT SeswavlisaTvis, saWiro iyo Zeglis Semadgeneli masalebis kompleqsuri Seswavla.

125

restavracia/konservacia

saqarTveloSi dRemde, calkeuli SemTxvevebis garda, xatweris teqnika jer kidev ar gamxdara Tanmimdevruli, interdisciplinaruli kvlevis sagani. am mxriv ubisis xatis kompleqsuri kvleva gansakuTrebiT mniSvnelovania, miT umetes, rom. xatis avTentikuroba ar aris darRveuli Semdgomi restavracia-ganaxlebebiT. kvlevisaTvis gamoviyeneT Cvens xelT arsebuli Semdegi mikrodestruqciuli meTodebi: xis dafis, tilos da cvilis Semkvrelis mikrobotanikuri, (paleobiologiis instituti), pigmentebis mikroqimiuri( Tbilisis samxatvro akademiis rest. ak. lab.) analizebi da Semkvrelebis fotospeqtrometruli (infrawiTeli speqtrometria) kvlevis meTodebi (stu minerfalogiis kaTedris lab.). aucilebelia xatis gamokvleva sxva fiziko-optikuri (u.i, i.w.,. radiografiuli) meTodebiTac. gamoyenebuli Semkvrelebis SeswavlisaTvis jer Catarda Semkvrelebis etalonebis, Semdeg ki xatis mikrofragmentebis kvleva. kvlevis Sedegebze dayrdnobiT xatis konservaciisaTvis Cvenis azriT mizanSewonili iqneba Semdegi meTodikis gamoyeneba: 1. tilos antiseptireba da sokos sporebis meqanikuri wesiT mocileba; 2. zevidan dakruli qaRaldis mSrali wesiT moxsna; 3. levkasisa da ferweris gamagrebis procesSi yoveli mikrofragmentisaTvis adgilis povna da damagreba maT qveS organuli webos mikrodozis SeyvaniT. es procesi aucilebelad binokularuli mikroskopis, el.dozimetris, teflonis mikroSpatelisa da firfitis gamoyenebiT unda Catardes. 4. tilos dakvra Sesaferisi simkvrivis iaponur qaRaldze; 5. dafis dezinseqticireba anoqsiis meTodiT da gansakuTrebiT darbilebuli adgilebis konsolidacia paraloid B-72-iT, dafis nakluli adgilebis Sevseba msubuqi merqnisagan damzadebuli fragmentebiT (es aucilebeli iqneba Weduri fragmentebis damagrebisaTvis); 6. ferweriani tilos damagreba xis safuZvelze; Zeglis Semdgomi dauzianeblobisaTvis aucilebeli iqneba specialuri vitrinakonteineris damzadeba pleqsiglasis markis orgminisagan.

darejan gogaSvili

Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia. saqarTvelo xelnawerTa erovnul centrSi daculi papirusebis konservaciis zogierTi sakiTxi xelnawerTa erovnul centrSi daculia Zv. w. III ­ ax. w. VIII ss. 160-mde papirusis fragmenti, romelic moicavs berZnul enaze Sesrulebul astrologiur da samedicino traqtatebs, iuridiul dokumentebs, sxvadasxva xasiaTis qviTrebs, fsalmunis, epistolaruli da mxatvruli teqstebis fragmentebs da sxva. papirusebi gasuli saukunis 50-ian wlebSi mouTavsebiaT or minas Soris. maTi umetesi nawili myife da msxvrevadia. teqsti ZiriTadad Sesrulebulia karbonuli, iSviaTad ki rkina-galuri melniT. moxsenebaSi ganxilulia melnis fenis dazianebis calkeuli SemTxvevebi da misi gamomwvevi mizezebi. xSiria papirusis furclis Semadgeneli vetikaluri da horizontaluri zolebisa da boWkoebis ganSreveba, deformacia, gvxvdeba papirusze dawebebuli qaRaldis fragmentebi, furclis zedapirze SeiniSneba miwa, WuWyi da mtveri. papirusis aseTi saxis dazianebas ganapirobebs papirusis, rogorc saweri masalis damzadebis teqnologia, xelnaweris forma (gragnili, kodeqsi) da garemo pirobebi (maTi umetesi nawili miwaSi iyo Camarxuli). papirusis da minis zedapirze xSirad SeiniSneba gamoleqili marilis kristalebi. gamoleqili marilis identifikaciisaTvis damzadda sakvlevi nimuSebi da Catarda Tvisobrivi analizi Na+, K+, Cu2+ , Fe2+, Cl- SO42+ ionebis aRmosaCenad. natriumis, kaliumis

126

restavracia/konservacia

da spilenZis ionebis arseboba ganisazRvra atomur absorbciul speqtro-fotometrze, Perkin Elmer 300 aparatze. rkinis ionebis aRmosaCenad gamoviyeneT kaliumis rodanidi, qloris ionebis aRmosaCenad-vercxlis nitrati, SO42+-is arseboba ganiszRvra BaCI2 -iT. analizis Sedegad sakvlev xsnarSi aRmoCnda natriumis da qloris ionebi. NaCl-is gamoleqva zedapirze permanentuli, TandaTanobiTi procesia da gamowveulia temperaturisa da tenianobis cvalebadobiT. moxsenebis daskvniT nawilSi, Catarebuli kvlevebis sfuZvelze, SeTavazebulia SesaZlo sakonservacio samuSaoebi. konservaciis meTodebisa da masalebis SerCevisas gaTvaliswinebulia papirusis mdgomareoba, dazianebis calkeuli SemTxvevebi da misi gamomwvevi mizezebi, sakonservacio masalebis da melnis urTierTmimarTeba.

mari -klod depasio

gabriel Sapotas sax. arqeologiuri masalis kvlevisa da konservaciis centri. safrangeTi restavracia Tu konservacia, ra avirCioT? didi xnis manZilze sazogadoeba restavratorisagan moiTxovda xelovnebis nimuSebis srul restavracias, anu maTTvis pirvandeli mdgomareobis dabrunebas. magram Tu gaviTvaliswinebT imas, rom droTa ganmavlobaSi Zveldeba, ziandeba da saxes icvlis nebismieri masala, gasagebi xdeba, rom nivTisaTvis e.w. pirveladi mdgomareobis dabruneba mxolod moCvenebiTi movlenaa. Tu xelovnebis bazarze msgavsi midgoma jer kidev arsebobs, samecniero-profesiul da zogadad kulturul wreebSi restavratorisagan ukve gansxvavebul midgomas moelian, rac gacilebiT nakleb Carevas, magram did pasuxismgeblobas gulisxmobs. saqarTveloSi ganxorcielebuli proeqtebis dros Cavatare antikuri xanis minisa da keramikis nimuSebis restavracia : 2005-Si sof. xovleSi aRmoCenili minis ori unikaluri suris, xolo 2007-Si mcxeTis muzeumis kuTvnili minisa da keramikuli WurWlis ramdenime nimuSis konservacia/restavracia. amasTanave es iyo saswavlo mecadineobebi Tbilisis samxatvro akademiis restavraciis fakuletis studentebisaTvis, sadac praqtikuli restavraciis teqnikisa da meTodebis swavlebasTan erTad Sevecade maTTvis amexsna konservaciis eTikis umTavresi principebi: mkafiooba (Zeglis avTentikurobisa da nebismieri sarestavracio Carevis mkafiod aRqmis SesaZlebloba), Zeglis mdgradoba da Seuqcevadoba. swored konservaciis mizanSewonilobaze, miznebze da profesiuli eTikis principebze dafiqrebis saSualebas iZleva mcxeTis muzeumsa da safrangeTSi, leis sen-Jermenis arqeologiis erovnul muzeumSi (MAN) daculi brinjaos sartylebisa da maTi restavraciis meTodebis msgavseba. saqme exeba 1885-88 wlebSi saqarTvelo-somxeTis sazRvarze warmoebuli arqeologiuri gaTxrebis Sedegad aRmoCenil da baton j. morganis mier safrangeTSi wamoRebul brinjaos sartylebs. 1997 da 2000 wlebSi ganxorcielda sartylebis xelaxali restavracia. samwuxarod 20-ian da 1978-79 wlebSi araswori da Seuqcevadi meTodebis gamoyenebiT Catarebuli restavraciis, agreTve, arasrulfasovnad Sedgenili, mwiri dokumentaciis gamo Tavis droze arsebuli informaciis nawili dRes ukve samudamodaa dakarguli; SeuZlebelia gravirebuli dekoris srulad wakiTxva. Semonaxulia morganis mier gakeTebuli ramdenime SeniSvna, xolo daculobis mdgomareobis aRwera ar arsebobs.

127

restavracia/konservacia

nivTebis sruli diagnostireba/ Seswavla SesaZlebeli gaxda mxolod 1997-2000 ww-Si ganxorcielebuli radiografiuli kvlevis Sedegad. Zeglebis konservacia/restavraciis miznebisa da koncefciis Camoyalibebis sirTule, SesaZlo riski, profesiuli eTikis moTxovnebi da samuSaoTa fasi restavrators sul ufro xSirad aiZulebs upasuxos kiTxvas, Tu ramdenad mizanSewonilia ama Tu im sakonservacio Carevis ganxorcieleba. amitom umjobesia avirCioT konservacia da ara restavracia.

nino kalandaZe

saqarTvelos saqarTvelo erovnuli muzeumi. Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia.

arqeologiuri brinjaos konservaciis meTodi vanis naqalaqarze aRmoCenili masalis mixedviT 2007 wlis kampaniis dros vanis arqeologiurma eqspediciam gamoavlina naqalaqarisaTvis manamde ucnobi saxis arqeologiuri Zegli-ganZi. is dafluli iyo kldovan dedaqanSi saxeldaxelod amoWil oTkuTxa ormoSi (sigrZe-1,85 m; sigane-0,85 m; siRrme-0,85 m), naqalaqaris qveda terasaze. es monakveTi warmoadgens naqalaqaris samxreT-aRmosavleT kides. aq dafiqsirda qalaqis damcavi kedlis naSTebi. rogorc Cans, ganZi daflulia mas Semdeg, rac kedeli daingra da misi saZirkvlis qvebi amoRebul iqna Semdgomi moxmarebisaTvis. ganZi Sedgeba rkinisa da brinjaos nawarmisagan. ganZs gamTxreli arqeologi dimitri axvlediani Semadgeneli nivTebiT gvianelinisturi xaniT aTariRebs, xolo, ganZis daflva, misive azriT, unda momxdariyo Zv.w. I s-is SuaxanebSi qalaqis dangrevis Semdeg. mogexsenebaT, rom amierkavkasiis qveynebze da, maT Soris, kolxeTzec gadioda savaWro-satranzito gza, romelic dasavleTs aRmosavleTis qveynebTan akavSirebda. berZen-romael avtorTa cnobebis mixedviT irkveva, rom es gza indoeTidan kaspiis zRvamde miemarTeboda, xolo Semdeg amierkavkasiis teritoriis gavliT (md.mtkvari, suramis uReltexili, rioni) aRwevda Savi zRvis sanapiros qalaq fasisTan da mere ukve sazRvao gziT SavizRvispireTisa da mcire aziis qalaqebs ukavSirdeboda. swored am garemoebebis gamo, Zalze saintereso da, amavdroulad, xSirad rTulic aris msjeloba ama Tu im nivTis warmomavlobisa da konkretuli regionisadmi mikuTvnebis Sesaxeb. kolxeTis oqroTi simdidreze saubroben berZeni da romaeli avtorebi. vanis arqeologiurma gaTxrebma daadastura, rom berZen da romael avtorTa cnobebs kolxeTSi oqros simravlis Sesaxeb realuri safuZveli hqonda. 2003-2004-2007 wlebis uaxlesma arqeologiurma aRmoCenebma naTelhyo, rom vani ara mxolod oqros, aramed vercxlis, brinjaosa da rkinis simravliTac iyo gamorCeuli. jer kidev ori aTasi wlis win didi berZeni istorikosi straboni aRniSnavda, rom "am qveynis simdidre oqroTi, vercxliT, rkiniTa da spilenZiT gvixsnis argonavtTa laSqrobis sababs" [T. yauxCiSvili "strabonis "geografia", Tb., 1957, gv. 70-71]. moxsenebaSi warmogidgenT 2007 wels aRmoCenili ganZis ori brinjaos artefaqtis sarestavracio sqemebs, romelic gamoyenebul iqna Cvens mier. yuradReba gamaxvilebul iqneba restavracia-konservaciis procesis dagegmvasa da kvlevebis specifikaze.

128

restavracia/konservacia

Tea kinwuraSvili

saqarTvelos saqarTvelo erovnuli muzeumi. Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro akademia.

vanis minebis skanirebis eleqtromikroskopul-energodispersiuli analizi, rentgenoflurescenciuri gamokvleva da restavracia-konservacia uZvelesi minis qimiuri Sedgenilobisa da teqnologiis SeswavliT mopovebul informacias, arqeologiur gamokvlevebTan erTad, gadamwyveti roli SeuZlia Seasrulos aRmoCenili minis nimuSebis ama Tu im regionisadmi mikuTvnebis sakiTxSi da am regionis kulturuli ganviTarebis donis SefasebaSi. samxreT kavkasiaSi, kerZod, saqarTveloSi, romelic yovelTvis imyofeboda Zveli savaWro gzebis gzajvaredinze, mopovebulia didi raodenobiT minis masala, romelic asaxavs ara mxolod am regionis, aramed Zveli samyaros minis warmoebis praqtikulad yvela etaps. uZvelesi epoqidan am saxis produqcias gansakuTrebuli adgili ukavia kacobriobis istoriaSi, Sesabamisad, didia mecnieruli interesi am saxis nawarmisadmi. saqarTvelo miekuTvneba msoflios im regionTa ricxvs, romlebSic minis warmoebas uZvelesi droidan icnobdnen. saqarTvelos teritoriaze mopovebuli minisa Tu minisebri nivTierebebisagan damzadebuli uZvelesi sagnebi Zv.w. III aTaswleuliT TariRdeba. es aRmoCenebi saSualebas iZleva, sxva qveynebTan erTad, saqarTveloc mivakuTvnoT minis warmoebis erT-erT uZveles keraTa ricxvs, saidanac igi CrdiloeTiT gavrcelda. Cveni kvlevis obieqts warmoadgens vanSi aRmoCenili Zv.w. V-IV ss. minis WurWeli. naSromis mizania minis restavracia-konservacia, rentgeno-flurescenciuri gamokvleviT Semferavi nivTierebebis dadgena, skanirebis eleqtromikroskopulenergodispersiuli analiziT minaSi Semaval elementebze informaciis mopoveba da warmomavlobis dadgena, radgan minis warmoebasTan erTad, zemoT aRniSnul periodSi, gavrcelebuli iyo minis nawarmis importica da eqsportic.

129

I V S E C T I ON

RE STOR AT I O N/CONS ERVAT ION

B I OLO G ICA L D ET ER IOR ATI O N I N CU LTUR AL H E RI TAGE

Maia Shavishvili

Department of Cultural Heritage of the Ministry of Culture, Monuments Protection and Sport of Georgia. Georgia General Overview of the Restoration field in Georgia Recently the processes of heritage protection, as well as restoration and rehabilitation of cultural heritage sites, have been more actively managed by the Ministry of Culture, Monuments Protection and Sport of Georgia. The branch developed out of multidisciplinary studies and is based on international experience. Its work is promoted in different directions: "State Program for Rescuing Unique Monuments" is currently under way. Some one hundred monuments, including paintings, architecture and manuscripts, have been restored under this program. Special emphasis has also been placed on the monuments listed as the UNESCO World Heritage Sites, and activity has begun on the following sites: Rehabilitation and infrastructure development of the Gelati Monastery complex; urgent intervention in a small Jvari Church in Mtskheta; documentation in the "Bagrati Church" in Kutaisi and carrying out research activities. The ministry collaborates with foundations for development of the branch to promote its work. Thanks to the support granted, the following work has been accomplished: translation and publication of a professional book under the authorship of I. Jakiletto, G. Caneva and I. Massari; publication of the collection of works "Conservation of Architectural Monuments", among others. The Faculty of Restoration of Fine Arts and Architecture, earlier integrated with other faculties, was founded in 2004 as an individual unit at the A. Kutateladze Tbilisi State Academy of Art. A diagnosticresearch laboratory was set up at the above facility, and a special education program, which meets international standards, was developed. As a result, interest in the field has increased. Georgian government grants have paid more attention to restoration activities. Popularization of the branch has generated great demand. It is attracting young people, who now have of the opportunity to gain skills by working along side professionals. The Archives of the Department of Monuments' Protection, formerly an independent body, was also integrated into the Ministry. Materials on restoration projects since 1920s are preserved in the archives. Today, parts of these documents can also be considered "monuments" of cultural heritage. They are of special value to restorers when accomplishing restoration and intervention activities.

Sabina Vedovello

A Shared Project

C.B.C. Conservazione Beni Culturali. Italy

In this paper I would like to provide an overview of a long period of collaboration which began in 1996 with funding from the World Bank Italian Trust Fund. That initial experience laid the foundations for an understanding of some of the principal problems facing the cultural heritage of Georgian monuments, and for the exchange of ideas about project planning and treatments. Three joint projects have been worked on up till now, in the churches at Kintsvisi, Timotesubani and Martvili. In each case, while the problems specific to the individual structures have been studied, at the same time each project has thrown light on approaches which can be applied in other situations. Furthermore, in each project Georgian professionals have shown ever higher levels and stronger senses of autonomy. The illustration of the three different projects, pointing out their intrinsic differences and sketching their separate evolutions, provides an idea of the complexity of the situations that had to be faced, and also shows how we arrived at the various treatment methods adopted, in each case following strict criteria aimed at

131

RE STOR AT I O N/CONS ERVAT ION

protecting the works. The study of the biological degradation found at the monuments is certainly one of the more interesting facets of the problems faced. However, at a more general level we would like to discuss: - the collaboration between conservators, art historians and public institutions dealing with both conservation training and heritage protection, particularly in terms of diagnostics and technical documentation - the broadening of understanding of issues concerning conservation through direct links between Italy and Georgia, two countries with a large and extensive heritage of wall paintings - the joint efforts to involve a wide range of different specialists and institutions in the planning and study of problems in conservation

Erik Wurger

Freelance Schola., Germany New Methods of the Consolidation of the Basement of Historic Structures The care for the cultural heritage and treasures is a feature of cultural nations. This includes preservation and maintenance of such historical buildings as: churches, monasteries, minarets as well as technical structures: bridges, aqueducts and etc. Alongside the commercial and touristic function these kinds of buildings serve as examples of countries' national identity. Besides their maintenance and preservation these buildings often need reconstruction. Throughout centuries the structures are affected by meteorological damage, earthquakes and inappropriately attached constructions. Quite often the damage to the basement occurs. The dropping down of the soil water level might cause the decay of basement's wooden supports, resulting the cracking. The soil is causative of inappropriate conditions that cause the non-homogenous sagging of the structure. The Pisa Tower can serve a good example for that. The reconstruction of the basement is usually very difficult and expensive. It is already 25 years that this new method has been introduced. Despite the fact that this method of basement reconstruction is still expensive, it is relatively simple. This method also gives the possibility to reinforce the basement under the level of soil waters. The method is based on the dilution of soil under the supporting walls and its transformation into a soilconcrete by the cement injection. While reaching the proper deepness of soil through the vertical drilling, the drill capping sprays the water with high pressure. It dissolves the nearby soil and dilutes it. The slow rotation of the drill the diluted soil forms a cylinder. Simultaneously to this process the second sprayer pours cement and presses it into the soil. The diluted soil mixed with cement form the soil-concrete columns, which serves as concrete supports for the building. The paper presents the described method referred as Jet Grouting in engineering literature using the examples of reconstruction of several churches in Austria and Croatia.

Mark Gittins

C.B.C. Conservazione Beni Cultural. Italy Methodological and Practical Approaches to the Conservation of Three Georgian Wall Paintings This paper aims to discuss the treatments which have been implemented in a series of conservation projects to conserve the wall paintings in three churches in the Republic of Georgia ­ the Church of St

132

R E ST OR AT I O N/CONS ERVAT ION

Nicholas, Kintsvisi, the Church of the Mother of God, Timotesubani and the Church of the Virgin, Martvili ­ over the period 1996-2008. The projects have involved both Georgian and foreign experts from a variety of disciplines. Designing the treatments has involved following a series of general methodological issues applicable to conservation treatments in general, as well as a series of questions tied more particularly to Georgian works and to these projects in particular. For example budgetary constraints meant that treatments had to be highly prioritised to identify the most necessary treatments, though this was very much in accordance with a principal of minimal intervention favoured by all members of the teams. Problems of physical and chemical compatibility were also to the fore: for example, the fact that most of the paintings considered in the projects were not executed in buon fresco but rather using secco techniques meant that the use of aggressive cleaning agents was out of the question. Materials also had to be selected for their long term stability and evaluated against the possibility of their leading to further deterioration: for example, due to the risk of attack by microorganisms, it was decided not to use traditional fixatives such as casein to reattach flaking paint. Finally, in the most recent treatments the perhaps underappreciated problem of aesthetic presentation of the paintings has also been considered, in terms of the treatment of losses, which attempts to minimise disturbances to the viewer caused by damage to the images, while at the same time adhering to the principals of minimal treatment

Nana Kuprashvili

Tbilisi State Academy of Art. Georgia 12th c Painting Techniques of the Main Church at Gelati Monastery Among the numerous murals of Gealti monastery the 12th c frescos of the narthex, the south-eastern the southern porch and the north-western chapels are the earliest ones. The study of the painting in the narthex unveiled that the techniques in which the murals are executed is of a special interest. These painting belong to the minority of those medieval Georgian murals, which are executed in the mixed technique. The major component of the plaster of these murals is lime - the crucial factor while employing the mixed technique. The earth pigments are used for the preparatory drawing, whereas the painting uses the precious pigments such as ultramarine, cinnabar and red led. Chronologically, from the paintings survived in Gelati the first layer of the murals in south-eastern chapel comes next. T. Virsaladze dated these murals to 12th c and considered them to be contemporaneous to the paintings of narthex. This layer is still visible from the existing painting in some places. This painting is also executed in the mixed technique. The fragments are survived on the level of preparatory drawing. The analyses of the painting of south-eastern chapel and those of narthex revealed that their plasters differ in terms of both - their content and thickness. The traces of another example of the early painting are observed in the southern porch, where the painting is almost vanished. The content of the plaster is similar to that of narthex. The plaster analyses give rise to the assumption that the narthex and southern porch were painted simultaneously in 12th c., whereas the first layer of south-eastern chapel was applied slightly later. Among the earliest paintings of Gelati also are the three figures of Holy women survived on the level of the preparatory drawing on the southern wall of north-western chapel, which are also executed in mixed techniques. The preparatory drawing is applied in red ochre. The plaster analyses unveil the interesting fact that its plaster is similar to that of the first layer of the south-eastern chapel.

133

RE STOR AT I O N/CONS ERVAT ION

Giulia Caneva

University Roma Tre. Italy Biodeterioration of Mural Paintings The biological attack of the mural paintings of the church of the Virgin in Martvilli was analysed, with a floristic and ecological approach. This problem was particularly relevant in the case of the western porch of the church, where diffuse growths of blackish, green and pink patinas, due to cyanobacteria (and other bacterial forms were detected. These biological colonisations were studied through optical microscopy and SEM, and differences between the different phenomenologies appeared mainly quantitative, with the exception of the pink ones. These latter seem, in fact, to referred to other bacterial forms, with carotenoid pigments, linked to high light input and lower values of humidity. In general, the changes in biodeterioration appeared to be correlated mainly to light and to the air circulation, especially the direction of humid air and fog during winter. Considering the porosity of the materials (mortars and stone) and the different environmental conditions in the porch, a map of the humidity level of the walls was carried out, using these organisms and their distribution as bioindicators. Some conservation treatments were carried out with preliminary tests of efficiency, using two biocides (Rocima 110 and Preventol R80, quaternary ammonium salts, in the first case plus an organotin compound) widely tested and used in the past. Through a microclimatic evaluation of the site, further interventions of environmental conditioning were also suggested, in order to limit the ecological ability of these organisms to grow, and solve this problem in a long lasting way.

Thomas Warsheid

LBW-Bioconsult. Germany Biodeterioration on Wall-Paintings The biodeteriorating effects of microorganisms on historical wall-paintings is based on a complex interaction between building physiscs (i.e. humidity, temperature, ventilation), the type of historical materials present (i.e. structure, thermal-hygric properties, nutritive effect) as well as the composition of the referring microflora and their metabolic activity. The deterioration of historical wall-paintings is basically determined by the porosity of the painted layer, the stability of their mineralic respectively organic matrix, the absorption of moisture and humidity, the load of soluble salts and the surrounding microclimatic conditions. Resulting damage processes are characterized by salt efflorescence, swelling and detaching pigment layers as well as disintegrating corrosion leading to powdering painting surfaces and the final loss of coherence of the wall paintings structure. The described damage forms are often accompanied by microbial impacts such as the biogenic enrichment of discolouring pigments (i.e. chlorophylls, melanins, carotinoids), the formation of moistureabsorbent, swelling and sticky biofilms, the penetration and mechanical stress by fungal hyphae, the enzymatic attack on organic substrates (i.e. historical binders, conservating consolidants) as well as the excretion of organic acids. Here, "Secco"-paintings are far more often victims of biodeterioration processes than "Fresco"-paintings since they offer a wider range of organic subtrates (i.e. starch, glue, casein, oil, egg yolk), but even anthropogenic influences can additionally support microbial deterioration processes by the increased deposition of organic fine dust as well as the application of polymer consolidants in the course of restoration treatments. Nevertheless the climatic conditions at site finally determine the extent of the potential microbial endargement. The complexity of biodeterioration impacts on wall-paintings will be discussed based on preliminary microbiological studies at the church of Ateni (Georgia) and related objects in Europe

134

R E ST OR AT I O N/CONS ERVAT ION

Francesco Imperi

University Roma Tre. Italy Understanding the Etiology of Rosy Discoloration on Ancient Wall Paintings: A Molecular Approach The inventory of microorganisms responsible for biological deterioration of ancient paintings has become an integral part of restoration activities. Here, the microbial agent of rosy discoloration on medieval frescoes in the Crypt of the Original Sin (Matera, Italy) was investigated by a combination of microscopic, molecular and spectroscopic approaches. The bacterial community from three rosy-discolored painting sites was characterized by 16S rRNA gene-based techniques. The eubacterial population was composed prevalently of Actinobacteria, among which Rubrobacter radiotolerans-related bacteria accounted for 63­87% of the 16S rRNA gene pool per sampled site. Archaea, with prevalence of Haloarchaea-related species, were detected in one of the three sites where they accounted for < 0.1% of the total 16S rRNA gene pool. Raman spectroscopy confirmed the identity between R. radiotolerans carotenoids (bacterioruberins) and pigments responsible for color alteration of frescoes. This investigation provides the first evidence of a causal relationship between heavy contamination by Rubrobacter-related bacterioruberin producing bacteria and rosy discoloration of ancient wall paintings.

Nino Kitovani

Georgian National Museum. Georgia The Information on the Study and Conservation Methodology of the Central Icon of the Ubisi Triptych The Ubisi icon of the Virgin (SEG#657, MM 225/a; 33X27 sm. Wood, canvas, gesso, gold, egg tempera, repousse), an important example of 13th century Georgian icon painting and metalwork, forms a part of the treasury of Ubisi Monastery and represents the central icon of the triptych specially created for this monastery. It was already damaged in 1925 when it was brought from Ubisi, together with other icons, to the Sh. Amiranashvili Museum of Art, where it is still kept today. Today, the icon remains in pieces. Its board has been split in two: the canvas with the painting and silver plates with gilded repousse décor. At this time, we will discuss only the condition of the ground paint layer, wood and canvas, and their methods of their study and conservation. There has been complex damage wrought to the organic and non-organic materials of the work, which make up its structural elements. Due to humidity and biological attacks present throughout the centuries, the chemical alterations and loss of mechanical stability to the piece is obvious. The binding material has disintegrated, the denseness of gesso (levkas) paint layer has decreased and the adhesiveness of the layers has weakened. There are paint losses, especially in the parts under the repousse. The board has been damaged by worms, powdered and fragmented; the canvas is fragile and fragmented as well. The glue used to attach the paper to the paint layer has also disintegrated. To determine the best methods of conservation and to better understand the technique and technology of Georgian icon painting, it was necessary to undertake the complex investigation of contents of the remaining parts. Only few cases of the systematic and interdisciplinary study of the icon painting technique exist. Considering this, the complex study of Ubisi icons is especially important, as long as the authenticity of the icon is not lost by the restoration/rehabilitation of the work. We have used the following available microdestructural methods: A microbotanical analysis of board, canvas and wax (performed by The Institute of Paleobiology); a microchemical analysis of the pigments

135

RE STOR AT I O N/CONS ERVAT ION

(performed at the laboratory of the Tbilisi Art Academy); and photospectometral analysis of the binder--an infrared spectrometry (performed at the STU laboratory of the Chair of Mineralogy). Further investigation of the icon using physical-optical (radiographic) methods is necessary. In order to investigate the binder used first the etalons were studied and then the micro fragments of the icon itself. Based on the result of the study, we consider that for the conservation of the icon the following methods should be used: Antisepticise the canvas and mechanically remove the fungi; 2) Remove the paper from the surface using dry method; 3) Individually allocate and fix all the micro fragments during the consolidation of gesso and painting by micro injecting organic glue under each fragment; this should be performed using binocular, dosimeter, Teflon plates, and microspatel while fixing the painting; 4) attach of the canvas on the Japanese paper of relevant thickness; 5) Anoxia of the board and further consolidation of especially fragile parts with Paraloid B-72; filling the board losses with light wooden fragments; (This is also necessary for the fixation of repousse fragments). 6) After conservation, the canvas with the painting should be attached to a board. And, finally, to protect the icon from further damage, it is necessary to encase it in a special container with a Plexiglas organic glass cover to ensure stable climate conditions.

Darejan Gogashvili

Tbilisi State Academy of Art Georgia. Georgia Several Issues Relating to the Conservation of the Papyruses Kept in the National Centre of Manuscripts The National Centre of Manuscripts keeps approximately 160 papyrus fragments, including astrological and medical treatises, legal documents, psalms, a variety of receipts, and fragments of epistolary and literary texts, which range in date from the 3rd century BC to the 8th century. In the 1950s, many of these artifacts were placed between two sheets of glass. Most of the papyruses are fragile and brittle. The texts were executed primarily in carbon, and occasionally, in iron gall ink. This presentation examines damages to this ink layer as well as studies the causes of such damage. There are many instances of stratification and deformation of vertical and horizontal stripes and of fibers. Some of the papyruses also preserve paper fragments that have been glued to them. Earth, dirt and dust can be seen on the folio surfaces. Damage can be explained by the technologies used in producing papyrus as writing material, the form of manuscripts (a scroll or codex) and their settings in which the papyruses were found (their majority had been buried in earth). Furthermore, crystals of precipitated salt can be detected on the papyruses and glass surfaces. Research samples were prepared for salt identification. Qualitative analysis has been conducted to detect Na+, K+, Cu2+ , Fe2+, Cl- SO42+ ions. The content of natrium, potassium and copper ions was determined on an atomic absorption spectrometre, Perkin Elmer 300. Potassium rhodante was used for the detection of iron ions, and silver nitrate for detection of chlorine nitrate, while the presence of SO42+ content was determined by means of BaCI2. Analysis has also shown the existence of natrium and chlorine ions in the solution that was studied. The precipitation of NaCI is a permanent, gradual process caused by the changing temperature and humidity. Relying on the findings of the research, the conclusive part of the presentation provides recommendations on conservation measures. The state of preservation of the papyruses, the type of damages and their causes, as well as the compatibility of conservation material and ink were taken into account while choosing conservation methods and materials.

136

R E ST OR AT I O N/CONS ERVAT ION

Mari Claude Depassiot

Municipal Center of Archaeological Studies and Restoration.France Restoration or Conservation, What to Choose? For a long time, restorers demanded to restore fully works of art, i.e. to return them to their initial appearance. However, if we consider the fact that over time every material gets older and is affected by various conditions and thus altered, restoring the initial appearance of an object seems elusive. Though this approach may still exist on the art market, the scientific-professional and cultural society expects a different approach from the restorer: minimal intervention and great responsibility. Within the scope of projects carried out in Georgia, I have implemented the restoration/conservation of antique glass and ceramics artifacts, namely of two unique glass jugs discovered in village Khovle in 2005 and some unique examples of glass and ceramic vessels kept in the Museum of Mtskheta. At the same time, I have provided the students of restoration at Tbilisi State Academy of Art with workshops, where I have demonstrated and explained the major principals of conservation ethics: clarity (the clear perception of the authentic image and the traces of any kind of intervention) and maintaining the stability of the work of art. Comparing the similarities between the restoration methods applied to the bronze belts kept in the Mtskheta Museum and those in National Museum of Archeology in Saint Germain in Laye (MAN), which were discovered near the Armenian-Georgian border in 1885-88 and later brought to France by J. Morgan, give us more ground to analyze the principles of the professional ethics of restoration, its goals and appropriateness. In 1997-2000, restoration work on the belts was performed for the second time. But, unfortunately, due to the incorrect and irreversible methods of restoration used in `20s and in 1978-79, and as a result of a lack of documentation of these methods, it is now entirely impossible to read the engraved décor. Though some notes by Morgan exist, there is no description of the belts' previous condition. The complete diagnostic study of the items became possible only after a radiographic investigation was performed in 1997 -2000. The difficulties related to the determination of the goals and conception of conservation/restoration, its risk factors, the demands of professional ethics, and the cost of restoring works are the factors which make the restorer think about the appropriates of any conservation intervention. That's why we should preference conservation, rather then restoration.

Nino Kalandadze

Georgian National Museum.Tbilisi State Academy of Art. Georgia The Method for Conservation of Bronze Artifacts by the Example of Findings Unearthed in Ancient Settlement of Vani The 2007 archaeological campaign in Vani was marked by the unearthing of buried treasure unusual for the site: iron and bronze artifacts. The treasure was buried in a quadrangular pit, hastily cut in the living rock (length ­ 1.85 m, width ­ 0.85 m, depth ­ 0.85 m) on the lower terrace of the city. The site under consideration lies at the south-east edge of the settlement. Remains of a defensive wall of the city can be traced there. Most likely, the treasure was buried after the defensive wall collapsed and substructure stones were removed to be re-used. Dimitri Akhvlediani, the archaeologist responsible for unearthing the treasure, dated the findings back to the Late Hellenic period. At the same time, he assumed that the treasure was buried in mid-first century B.C., after the city was razed to ground.

137

RE STOR AT I O N/CONS ERVAT ION

As it is well known, a transit trade road passed through the territories of the Transcaucasian countries, including Colchis, linking east with west. According to the accounts of Greek-Roman authors, the trade road started in India, passed along the Caspian Sea, crossed Transcaucasus (Mtkvari River, Surami pass, Rioni River), and went on to the Black Sea shore city of Phasis. From there, it went still further along the Black Sea and reached Asia Minor cities. Due to such circumstances, it is difficult to state from where exactly an artifacts excavated at the site originates. As the writings of Greek-Roman authors reveal, Colchis was rich in gold. Excavations carried out in Vani have proved that the accounts of Greek-Roman authors are well-grounded. The recent (2003, 2004, 2007) archaeological findings have uncovered evidence to suggest that Vani was rich not only in gold, but in silver, bronze and iron as well. Two thousand years ago, the Greek historian Strabo wrote the following: "The wealth of the regions about Colchis, which is derived from the mines of gold, silver, iron, and copper, suggest a reasonable motive for the expedition [of Jason], (Strabo, The Geography, I, 2.39). The paper deals with restoration schemes applied by us to two bronze artifacts excavated in Vani in 2007. The planning process for restoration and conservation and the specificity of the approach used will be accentuated.

Tea Kintsurashvili

Georgian National Museum. Tbilisi State Academy of Art. Georgia Scanning Glassware from Vani by Means of Electronic Microscope-Energy Dispersive Analysis: Its X-ray-Fluorescence study, Restoration and Conservation Information obtained in a process of studying the chemical composition and production technology of ancient glassware, jointly with archaeological data, can be decisive for attributing glass artifacts to a certain region and for evaluating the level of cultural development of that region. Glass artifacts unearthed in abundance in the south Caucasus region, namely in Georgia, which lies at the crossroad of ancient trade routes, carry information on glass manufacturing stages characteristic of not only of the region, but of the entire ancient world in general. As glassware has been of special importance in the history of mankind, scholarly interest in its samples is of special significance. Georgia is among the regions throughout the world, which produced glass since ancient times. The most ancient artifacts from glass and glass-like materials unearthed throughout the territory of Georgia are dated to the third millennium B.C. These findings enable us to identify Georgia as the most ancient site of glass production, from where the technology was spread to regions in the north. The objective of our study concerns glassware dating to the fifth - fourth cenutry B.C. unearthed in Vani. The paper deals with restoration and conservation of glass artifacts, as well as with determination of dye-stuffs used in the process of manufacturing by means of X-ray fluorescence technology; collecting information on the components used for glass production by means of electronic microscope-Energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence technology; electronic microscope-energy dispersive scanning analysis of the composition; and establishing the place of pruduction. The latter issue is of special importance, as in the period under consideration, in addition to producing glass locally, importing and exporting glassware was a widespread practice.

138

sastendo moxsenebebi / Poster Presentations

guram WeiSvili. Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro aKademia. saqarTvelo martvilis taZris (VII-XIXss) diagnostikuri kvlevis, arqiteqturis reabilitaciis da freskebis konservaciis proeqti Guram Cheishvili. Tbilisi State Academy of Art. Georgia The Project of the Diagnostic Studies, Rehabilitation of Architectural Structure and Conservation of Frescos of Martvili Church (7th -19thc) guram WeiSvili. Tbilisis saxelmwifo samxatvro aKademia. saqarTvelo timoTesubnis taZris (XII-XIII ss) diagnostikuri kvlevis, arqiteqturis reabilitaciis da freskebis konservaciis proeqti Guram Cheishvili. Tbilisi State Academy of Art. Georgia The Project of the Diagnostic Studies, Rehabilitation of Architectural Structure and Conservation of Frescos of Timotesubani Church (12th-13th c) Tamar iaSvili. s. durmiSiZis sax. bioqimiisa da bioteqnologiis instituti. saqarTvelo mikrobiologiuri dazianebis kvlevis meTodebi da prevencia Tamar Iashvili. S. Durmishidze biochemical and biotechnology Institute, Georgia The Methods of Study of Biodeterioration and Its Prevention

139

V seqcia

kulturuli turizmi

knut gerberi

GTZ. germania kulturuli turizmis ekonomikuri efeqtis Sesaxeb - SesaZleblobebi metia Tu riski? saqarTvelos, rogorc kulturuli turistebis mzardi raodenobis maspinZeli qveynis Sesaxeb, dRes ufro meti kiTxva meqneboda, vidre pasuxi... evropaSi "kulturul turizms" zurgs mniSvnelovani faqtebi da monacemebi umagrebs, magaliTad turistTa saerTo raodenobis 23,5% "kulturul turistebze" modis, maTgan 31-ze meti "zogadad kulturuli", xolo 3,5% ki "konkretuli kulturuli" turistia. es Suqs hfens mosalodnel Sedegebs, rogorc maspinZeli regionebisaTvis, ise adgilobrivi macxovreblebisa da kulturuli memkvidreobisaTvis. raSi mdgomareobs (kulturuli) turizmis ekonomikuri efeqtis dadebiTi mxare? es aris, ZiriTadad, moxmareba, rac mosdevs turistTa meti raodenobiT Camosvlas da RamisTeviT darCenas. es gulisxmobs met sagadasaxado Semosavals maspinZeli regionisaTvis da ekonomikuri efeqtis Semdgom gavrcelebas adgilobriv turistul, kulturul da sxva samsaxurebze. kulturuli turizmi qmnis samuSao adgilebs, kulturul da sawarmoo seqtorebSi. muSa xelze gazrdil moTxovnas Tan sdevs dadebiTi gavlena socialur da sagadasaxado sferoze. kulturuli turizmi did rols asrulebs daniSnulebis adgilis axali profilis SeqmnaSi. es exmareba garkveuli adgilis "saTuTi" mxareebis gamovlenas, rasac did mniSvnelobas aniWeben investorebi gadawyetilebebis miRebisas da mas, aseve, gaaCnia xarisxobrivi da aramaterialuri funqcia samomavlo sacxovrebeli garemos CamoyalibebaSi. kulturuli turizmi sezonuri ar aris, ris gamoc turistTa raodenoba ar aRwevs sezonur piks da, Sesabamisad, ekonomikuri efeqtic mTel welze nawildeba. kulturul turizms wvlili Seaqvs endogenuri potencialis ganviTarebaSi. es xels uwyobs regionis/qalaqis TviTmyofadobis da Sesabamisad bazarze gayidvis unikluri SeTavazebis (USP) gaCenas, amasTanave, xels uwyobs adgilobrivi mosaxleobis da mewarmeTa saqmianobis dakavSirebas da, Sesabamisad, axali saqmiani kontaqtebis da SesaZleblobebis gaCenas. raSi mdgomareobs (kulturuli) turizmis ekonomikuri efeqtis negatiuri mxare? pirvel rigSi, es aris Tavad turizmis komercializacia! am SemTxvevaSi kulturuli momomsaxurebis mizania mxolod mogebis miReba da ara kulturis sxva faseulobebis warmoCena. imisaTvis, rom CamomsvlelTa raodenoba maqsimalurad gaizardos da a.S., kulturuli momsaxureba xSirad modificirebulia turistis molodinis gasamarTleblad, magram, aseT SemTxvevebSi, xSirad ikargeba identuroba da yvelaferi mxolod sanaxaobas emsgavseba! amas mivyavarT adgilobrivi TviTmyofadobis da mis miRma arsebuli koncefciis dayvanas kulturuli produqtis donemde. yvelaze mniSvnelovani is aris, rom meti turistis Camosvlas mosdevs meti sacobi, xmauri, dabinZureba da sxva datvirTva garemosaTvis, amiT adgilis momxibvleloba klebulobs, rom araferi vTqvaT nagebobaTa istoriuli arsis "cveTis" Seuqcevadobaze.

141

kulturuli turizmi

beTsi haskeli

turizmis komiteti, amerikis savaWro palata saqarTveloSi. aSS turizmi saqarTveloSi saqarTvelo mdidaria siZveleebiT, kulturuli da arqeologiuri RirsSesaniSnaobebiT da mimzidveli adgilia stumrobisaTvis. saqarTveloSi nebismieri, vinc samoTx metrze miwas gaTxris, qveynis TiTqmis yvela mxareSi V an VI saukunis naqalaqars an nasoflars aRmoaCens. amas saqarTvelos mravalferovani topografiac emateba, dawyebuli kavkasiis qedis umaRlesi mwvervalebidan, damTavrebuli daviT garejis monastris udabno SemogareniT. saqarTvelo, aseve, mdidaria unikaluri floriTa da fauniT, Tumca amJamad qveynis simdidris aRmosaCenad mogzaurs didi simamace marTebs, rac imiT aris gamowveuli, rom bolo 20 wlis ganmavlobaSi infrastruqturis ganviTarebaSi investicia ar Cadebula. gzebi gauvalia, ar arsebobs sagzao niSnebi, kargi sastumroebi da restornebi Znelad mosaZebnia. zomieri klimatisa da Tavgadasavlebis maZiebel turistTa interesis miuxedavad sabWoTa periodis gadmonaSTebisagan gaTavisuflebas Zalze xangrZlivi dro dasWirda. komunistur periodSi saqarTveloSi turizmSi investiciebis simciris erT-erTi mizezi, albaT, is iyo, rom sabWoTa kavSiris Caketil sivrceSi saqarTvelo yvelaze popularul daniSnulebis adgils warmoadgenda - da radganac pirobebis miuxedavad saqarTvelo mainc popularobiT sargeblobda, infrastuqturis gasaumjobeseblad aRaraferi gakeTebula. bolo xanebamde turistebis mizidvis koncefciis SemuSaveba, komfortuli da usafrTxo sastumroebis mSeneblobisa da nangrevebis aRdgenis sakiTxis ganxilva, iseve rogorc, qarTuli da rusuli enebis garda, Tanamedrove informaciis sxva enebze miwodeba warmoudgeneli iyo da yovelive amis mcdeloba drois fuW kargvad aRiqmeboda. miuxedavad yvelafrisa, vardebis revoluciis Semdeg da prezidentis mier Setanilma cvlilebebma da dasaxulma prioritetebma turistuli infrastruqturis ganviTarebisaTvis investiciebis mozidva prioritetad aqcia. qalaq siRnaRis infrastruqturis mosawesrigeblad gamoiyo daaxloebiT 30 milioni lari. amJamad qalaqi saocrad mSvenieria, Tumca adgilobrivebs jer kidev gasacnobierebeli aqvT maRaziebis, kargi restornebisa da kafeebis arsebobis saWiroeba. msgavsi investicia iqna Cadebuli quTaisis Zvel nawilSic. mTavrobis dabal procentiani sesxebis saSualebiT, yvelgan Sendeba axali sastumroebi, magram maRaziebis, restornebisa da kafeebis koncefcia jer kidev ar aris aqtiurad SemuSavebuli. am bolo xanebSi dasrulebul strategiul gegmaSi, romelic turizmisa da kurortebis departamentma aSS-s mTavrobis TDA dafinansebiT SeimuSava, dasaxulia arsebuli problemebi da maTi mogvarebis strategia. vimedovnebT, rom am problemebis gadasaWrelad saqarTvelos mTavroba saWiro resursebs gamohyofs.

paata SanSiaSvili

aSS Sinagani departamentis saerTaSoriso teqnikuri daxmarebis programa. saqarTvelo saqarTvelos turistuli konkurentunarianobis gazrda daculi teritoriebis qselis Seqmnis meSveobiT saqarTvelo mTagoriani qveyanaa, romlis mosaxleoba mxolod ramdenime milionia. misi landSafti moicavs mtknari wylis uxv hidrografiul qsels, mTiswina da mTian regionebs, sub-alpur da alpur mdeloebs, myinvarebs, didi da mcire kavkasionis

142

kulturuli turizmi

TovliT dafarul mwvervalebs, romlebic zRvis donidan 5 000 metrs aRwevs, Savi zRvis sanapiroebs, Warbtenian teritoriebs, dasavleT saqarTvelos notio dablobebis tyeebs da samxreT-aRmosavleT saqrTvelos aridul stepsa da naxevrad aridul udabnoebs. qveynis 40% dafarulia tyiT. sxvadasxva bio-geografiuli pirobebi xels uwyobs saxeobaTa mravalferovnebas, endemizmis maRal dones da iSviaTi habitatebis tipebis simravles, iseve, rogorc istoriuli da kulturuli landSaftebis gamorCeul mravalferovnebas da unikalurobas. daculi teritoriebis sistemis Seqmna, romelic emsaxureba bunebrivi da kulturuli erovnuli memkvidreobis SenarCunebas, qveynis mdgradi ganviTarebis erT-erTi umTavresi Semadgenelia. is erTdroulad momgebiania ekologiuri da ekonomikuri TvalsazrisiT da, amasTanave, ucxoel da adgilobriv vizitorebs mimzidvel da esTetikurad sasiamovno saganmanaTleblo, rekreaciul da saTavgadasavlo SesaZleblobebs Tavazobs. erovnuli daculi teritoriebis kanonmdebloba adgens samarTlebriv CarCos 6 erovnuli da 3 globaluri kategoriisaTvis (msoflio memkvidreobis ubani, ramsaris ubani da biosferuli rezervati). erovnuli daculi teritoriebis kategoriebi gamiznulia: · mkacri dacvisaTvis ­ nakrZali; · ekosistemis konservaciisa da rekreaciisaTvis _ erovnuli parki; · unikaluri bunebrivi warmonaqmnebis SesanarCuneblad ­ bunebis Zegli; · aqtiuri menejmentis saSualebiT konservacisaTvis ­ aRkveTili; · kulturuli landSaftis konservaciisa da rekreaciisaTvis _ daculi landSafti; · bunebrivi ekosistemis mdgradi gamoyenebisaTvis _ mravalmxrivi gamoyenebis daculi teritoria; erovnuli parkis, bunebis Zeglis da daculi landSaftis erT-erTi upirvelesi mizania vizitorTa momsaxureba. turistuli saqmianoba eTavseba aRkveTilsa da mravalmxrivi gamoyenebis dacul teritorias, xolo formaluri saganmanaTleblo saqmianobis warmarTva erT-erTi mizania nakrZalisTvisac. daculi teritoriebi vizitorebs RamisTevis, kvebisa da samaSvelo momsaxurebasTan erTad bunebrivi da kulturuli resursebis materialuri da aramaterialuri faseulobebis Semecnebis saSualebas, mravalferovan rekreaciul da saTavgadasavlo perspeqtivebs Tavazobs. vizitorTa infrastruqturis ganviTarebas safuZvlad udevs mdgradi ganviTarebis da garemos dacvis eTikis principebi. aramaterialuri resursebis Seswavla da saTanado gamoyeneba am procesis principuli nawilia.

niko kvaracxelia

Tbilisis ekonomikur urTierTobaTa saxelmwifo universiteti. saqarTvelo saqarTveloSi kulturuli turizmis ganviTarebis tendenciebi da perspeqtivebi XX saukunis 80-iani wlebidan kulturuli turizmi xasiaTdeba swrafi ganviTarebiT, rac gamowveulia, erTi mxriv, saerTaSoriso konferenciebisa da kongresebis xSiri organizebiT, xolo, meore mxriv, turizmSi mecnieruli kvlevebis Sedegad gakeTebuli rekomendaciebis danergviT da samogzauro Tematikis daxvewiT da misi daaxloebiT momxmarebelTa moTxovnebTan. turoperatorTa winadadebebi ufro metad daefuZna mimzidveli obieqtebis gamorCevas. Tanamedrove turizmis warmatebebi sul ufro damokidebuli xdeba sam umniSvnelovanes pirobaze:

143

kulturuli turizmi

masebis keTildReobis zrda: meore msoflio omis Semdeg industriuli evropis sazogadoebis wevrTa wliuri Semosavlebi 25-jer gaizarda. gaizarda mosaxleobis msyidvelobiTi unari da SesaZleblobebi. gaumjobesda cxovrebis done, rac aisaxa Tavisufali drois dagegmvis srulyofaSi. adamianebma SeZles meti Tanxebi da dro dauTmon dasvenebas da mogzaurobas. drois mzardi biujeti: drois zemoaRniSnul periodSi evropaSi Semcirda samuSao kviris saaTebi da Sesabamisad gaizarda adamianis Tavisufali dro. es, gansakuTrebiT wlis ganmavlobaSi, mosaxleobisTvis uqme da gamosasvleli dReebis raodenobaSi gaxda SesamCnevi. adamianebs gauCndaT meti arasamuSao dro da es realoba kidev ufro gaizrdeba da maqsimums 2020 wlisaTvis miaRwevs. kviraSi xuTi samuSao da ori gamosasvleli dRe, erovnuli da religiuri dResaswaulebi, Svebulebis dReebi - yvelaferi erTad iZleva Tavisaufali drois did monakveTs, romelsac dagegmva da Sinaarsianad gatarebisTvis zrunva sWirdeba. mogzaurobebiT adamianebis gataceba: survili, romelic adamians samogzaurod ubiZgebs, calke Seswavlis Rirsia da igi ar aris erTgvarovani, magram evropis mosaxleobaSi arsebuli samogzauro mobiluroba namdvilad TvalSisacemia da masobrivi xasiaTisaa. mecnierTa azriT amas xeli Seuwyo satransporto sistemisa da komunikaciebis gaumjobesebam. magram turizmis industriis sasaxelod unda iTqvas, rom igi Rirseulad momzadebuli Sexvda masebis moTxovnebs da uzrunvelyo maTi survilebi warmoudgenlad mravalferovani SeTavazebebiT. turizmis ekonomika am mravalferovnebas efuZneba. turistuli saqmianobis is nairsaxeoba, romelsac kulturul turizms vuwodebT, moicavs rogorc humanitarul, ise biznesis sferos. imavdroulad kulturuli turizmi aris teritoriuli erTeulis ekonomikuri da kulturuli ganviTarebis erTerTi yvelaze perspeqtiuli seqtori. mraval turistul qveyanaSi es seqtori miCneulia ganviTarebis prioritetul mimarTulebad. saqarTveloc am qveynebs ganekuTvneba, miTumetes, rom kulturuli turizmis ganviTarebisaTvis aq namdvilad didi potenciali arsebobs: mimzidveli buneba, klimati, landSaftebi, erovnuli parkebi, sakurorto adgilebi, mTis kurortebi mdidari mineraluri wylebiT da sxva samkurnalo TvisebebiT da saqarTvelos istoriuli Zeglebi umdidresi Tavisi raodenobiTa da mravalferovnebis xarisxiT, romlebic mravladaa qveynis yvela kuTxeSi. 12 aTasi istoriuli Zeglidan 5 aTass icavs saxelmwifo, xolo oTxi maTgani Setanilia iuneskos unikalur ZeglTa siaSi. gamomdinare potencialidan, Sesabamisad adeqvaturi unda iyos SeTavazebac. samwuxarod, unda aRiniSnos, rom mTels saqarTveloSi receptiuli turistuli firmebis ricxvi, romlebic miRebaze warmatebiT muSaoben, aTeuls ar aRemateba. mraval xelisSemSlel mizezTa Soris qvemoTCamoTvili mizezebis gaTvaliswinebaa aucilebeli: 1. saqarTveloSi kulturuli turizmis turebi moicavs, rogorc wesi, erTxel amorCeul obieqtebs da aseTi turi gadis ramdenime turistuli firmis mier gakvalul marSrutebze. aravin cdilobs siaxlis Setanas da inovaciuri meTodebis danergvas. uamravi STambeWdavi Zegli rCeba turistuli firmebisa da, Sesabamisad, turistebis yuradRebis gareSe. 2. saxelmwifo ar aris dakavebuli turoperatorebisaTvis rekomendaciebis momzadebiT, maTTvis Zeglebis nusxis SedgeniTa da maTi informaciuli uzrunvelyofiT. ar aris kavSiri saxelmwifosa da kerZo seqtors Soris. 3. turoperatorebi faqtiurad ar ewevian profesiul saqmianobas axali turistuli marSrutebis Sesaqmnelad, radgan maTTvis aseTi saqmianoba ar aris didi mogebis momtani.

144

kulturuli turizmi

4. uRimRamoa turistuli reklama, aravinaa dakavebuli saprezentacio da sasuveniro produqciis xarisxiT. ar xdeba moTxovna-miwodebis kvleva. 5. kulturul turizmSi TiTqmis araa CarTuli raionebisa da soflebis muzeumebi. ar arsebobs maTi gamoyenebis programa an gegma. 6. unda Seiqmnas kulturuli turizmis sainformacio uzrunvelyofis saxelmwifo programa, romelic saTanado RonisZiebebs dasaxavs.

doroTea papaTanasiu-zurTi

egeosis universiteti, IRIS kvleviTi laboratoria. saberZneTi transinterpret II: memkvidreobis interpretacia, rogorc gza gamocdilebisaken. saberZneTis magaliTi multisensoruli

miuxedavad imisa, rom farTo sabazro segmentebisaTvis memkvidreobis resursia mogzaurobis ZiriTadi motivi, naklebad cnobili kulturuli memkvidreoba Tanamedrove, rogorc aseTi, adamianis mexsierebis da rogorc aseTi, Semecnebis procesis miRma rCeba. xiluli Zeglebi SeiZleba aRqmul iqnas, rogorc epoqaluri maniSneblebi, romlebic mnaxvels istoriaSi mogzaurobas sTavazobs. amdenad, msgavsi epoqaluri maniSneblebi mravalferovani auditoriis moTxovnebs unda akmayofilebdes. siaxlis da ukve kargad nacnobis, avTenturisa da Tqmulebebis dabalansebiT, Zeglis warsulsa da awmyos SeuZlia misi adgilis gansazRvra zogad istoriul procesSi. saberZneTis periferiebSi kargad aqvT gaazrebuli adgilobrivi memkvidreobis turistuli potenciali. da mainc, xSirad, adgilobriv mTavrobebs ar ZaluZT Seqmnan turizmis ganviTarebis damoukidebeli srulyofili gegmebi, maSin, roca adgilobriv mosaxleobas sul ufro metad awuxebs ukontrolo turistuli nakadis gavlenisagan sakuTari TviTmyofadobis, garemos, bunebrivi da kulturuli simdidris dacvis problemebi. amavdroulad, sxvadasxva turistuli segmentebi axorcielebs zewolas turistul industriaze gamocdilebaTa mravalferovnebisa da aqtivobaTa diapazonis gasafarToveblad. aRniSnuli moxseneba warmogvidgens dagegmvis im process, rasac unda mohyves memkvidreobis TviTkoordinirebul mimarTulebaTa dasaxva saberZneTis periferiebis istoriul mravalferovnebaze dayrdnobiT, transinterpret II-is farglebSi da C.I. Leader+-is egidiT. transinterpret II aviTarebs memkvidreobis interpretaciasTan dakavSirebul proeqtebs, dinamikurad mzard monacemTa bazis standartebisa da rekomendaciebis gaTvaliswinebiT. amasTan, is uzrunvelyofs xarisxis niSniT monacemTa specifikaze dayrdnobiT Seqmnil interpretaciul proeqtebsa da momsaxurebas. transinterpret II miznad isaxavs sazogadoebis CarTvas da regionuli mTavrobisa da akademiuri wreebis TanamSromlobis xelSewyobas, imisaTvis, raTa: a) aamaRlos procesSi monawile mxareebis codna memkvidreobis interpretaciis mniSvnelobaze; b) moaxdinos rekreaciul zonebSi damsvenebelTa Tavisufali drois realizacia; g) gaacnos adgilobriv da ucxoel stumrebs regionis istoriuli da kulturuli memkvidreobis RirsSesaniSnaobebi da d) Seqmnas saberZneTis soflebisa da periferiebis unikaluri turistuli saxe. "proeqti "herodote": istoriuli garemos tursituli gamoyeneba. nou-haus da xarisxis menejmentis praqtika regionul doneze": TanamSromlobis qseli regionuli TviTmyofadobis da kulturuli memkvidreobis popularizaciisaTvis saerTaSoriso da multidisciplinarul doneze mimdinare decentralizaciis procesi, romelic uzrunvelyofs turizmis produqtis maRal damatebiT Rirebulebas, yovelTvis utopia ar aris. saberZneTsa da italias Soris arsebuli erTaSorisi TanamSromlobis

145

kulturuli turizmi

qseli - "herodote", romelic C.I.P. arqimede IIIB-s mier finansdeba, miznad isaxavs istoriuli garemos turizmis "agentad" gaazrebas, rac partniorTa teritoriebis farglebSi memkvidreobis marTvisa da turizmis dagegmvis saukeTeso gamocdilebis gavrcelebis saSualebiT unda ganxorcieldes. "herodote" amkvidrebs TanamSromlobis axal formas akademiur wreebsa da periferiis mkvidrTa Soris, virtualur da realur garemoSi turizmisaTvis Rirebuli informaciis marTviT, rekreaciul saswavlo garemoSi sakomunikacio politikis gamoyenebisa da memkvidreobis interpretaciis meTodis meSveobiT. adgilobrivi/regionuli memkvidreobis valorizaciisaTvis farTod gavrcelebuli naklovanebebisa da warmatebebis faqtorTa kvlevis saWiroebis gaazrebis Semdeg, "herodote"-m am naklovanebebis aRmosafxvrelad Seqmna partniorTaSorisi SemecnebiTi qseli. aTi partniori italiidan da saberZneTidan, romlebic warmoadgenen akademiur dawesebulebebs, adgilobriv avtoritetebsa da regionul doneze turizmis industriasTan dakavSirebul sxvadasxva erTeulebs, erTad SemuSavebuli gegmarebiTi meTodebiTa da resursebiT xelmZRvanelobs. qselis mravalerovani xasiaTi xels uwyobs partniori qveynebis seqtorTaSoris TanamSromlobas, rac, Tavis mxriv, dadebiT gavlenas axdens regionul politikaze, stimuls aZlevs samewarmeo inovaciebs da xmelTaSuazRvispireTSi xarisxis menejmentis praqtikas avrcelebs. qseli ZiriTadad damokidebulia mowinave nou-haus danergvasa da SemdgomSi TiToeuli partnioris mier regionul da adgilobriv doneze mis damoukideblad gavrcelebaze. procesis dinamika scdeba programis finansur CarCoebs, rac iZleva proeqtis mdgradobis da saukeTeso praqtikis sxvadasxva teritorialur da socialur garemoSi gavrcelebis garantias. specifikuri instrumentebisa da meTodologiebis erTad SemuSaveba uzrunvelyofs regionul/adgilobriv doneze turizmis "agentebis" profesionaluri codnis amaRlebas turizmis dagegmvis, memkvidreobis marTvis da interpretaciis Sesaxeb. gamocdilebis gacvla-gamocvla (seminarebi sxvadasxva erovnebis warmomadgenelTaTvis da xuT sxvadasxva regionSi Catarebuli kvleva) xels Seuwyobs memkvidreobis menejmentis partniori mxareebisaTvis specifikuri strategiebis SemuSavebas da wvlils Seitans turistuli regionis Seucvleli iersaxis SeqmnaSi. proeqtebis ganxorcielebis Sedegad gamokveTili saukeTeso praqtika warmoaCens saerTaSoriso TanamSromlobis meSveobiT SeZenil jamur nou-haus, romelic SemdgomSi gavrceldeba regionul/adgilobriv doneze, rogorc erTgvari gzamkvlevi xarisxiani turistuli produqtebis danergvisaTvis.

mine kadiroRlu

bulent isleri. avstria kulturuli turizmi tao-klarjeTSi moxsenebis mizania Crdilo-aRmosavleT anatoliaSi Sua saukuneebis qarTuli kulturuli memkvidreobis mimarT saerTaSoriso interesis gamoRviZeba, tao-klarjeTsa da mis mimdebare teritoriaze kulturuli turizmis ganviTarebis saSualebiT. amJamad is turistebi, romlebic stumroben tao-klarjeTis Zeglebs, umetesad, Sua saukuneebis qarTuli arqiteqturis ZeglebiT dainteresebuli qarTvelebi arian, Tumca Tavisufali turebi, aTi an meti dRis xangrZlivobiT, romlebic moicavs oSkis, iSxanis, tbeTis da sxv. saeklesio Zeglebze eqskursiebs, SeiZleba organizebul iqnas xandazmuli momlocvelebisaTvis, maSin, rodesac "moxetiale" turebi Tvalwarmtaci peizaJis fonze mowyobil unda iqnas enTuziazmiT savse SezRuduli Tavisufali drois mqone, Tumca energiuli axalgazrda momlocvelTaTvis. turistebis kidev erT jgufs Seadgenen Turqi, umetesad, qarTuli warmomavlobis

146

kulturuli turizmi

mqone biznesmenebisagan, romelnic saqarTvelos respublikaSi komerciuli (savaWro) da industriuli miznebiT mogzauroben. aRniSnuli jgufi moicavs warmatebul da ganaTlebul Turq moqalaqeebs, romelTa interesic qarTuli kulturuli memkvidreobisadmi gamoRviZebul unda iqnas. imis mere, rac siamovnebas miiReben qarTvelTa stumarTmoyvareobiT, maRali xarisxis RviniT, samzareuloTi da ZviradRirebuli sastumroebiT, isini datkbebian kavkasiis umSvenieresi peizaJebiTa da gaecnobian unikalur Zeglebs, biznesmenebi aRar daiSureben Zalisxmevas tao-klarjeTSi konservaciis mcdelobaTa mxardasaWerad. amis xelSesawyobad, mokle (magaliTad, 5 an 6 dRiani) eqskursiebi unda iqnas organizebuli, dawyebuli tao-klarjeTis ukeTesad daculi Zeglebidan - saqarTvelos yvelaze STambeWdavi samonastro kompleqsebiT da Tbilisis muzeumebis CaTvliT. TurqeTSi dasavleTidan da aRmosavleTidan mimaval turistebs, romelTa ricxvic yovelwliurad izrdeba, stimuli unda mieceT tao-klarjeTis qarTuli Zeglebis mosanaxuleblad. kavkasiis mimarTulebiT "moxetiale" turebi unda daigegmos dawyebuli tao-klarjeTidan an saqarTvelos nebismieri sxva adgilidan da unda moicavdes qarTuli Sua saukuneebis zogierT ukeT dacul Zegls. specialurad qarTuli Sua saukuneebis Zeglebis mosanaxuleblad dagegmili eqskursiebi xels Seuwyobs fasdaudebeli qarTuli kulturuli memkvidreobis popularizacias mTels msoflioSi. Tumca, avtori kvlav eWvis TvaliT uyurebs masobrivi turizmis pozitiur Sedegebs, gansakuTrebiT SedarebiT mitovebul adgilebSi, sadac kuturuli memkvidreobis naSTebia SemorCenili; is acnobierebs im upiratesobebs, rac, SesaZloa, msoflio masStabis aRiarebam moutanos Sua saukuneebis qarTul kulturul memkvidreobas taoklarjeTSi. yovelive aqedan gamomdinare, moxseneba moicavs RonisZiebebs, rogoricaa kargad gansazRvruli marSrutebis SeTavazeba ara mxolod tao-klarjeTSi, aramed saqarTvelos nebismier sxva mxareSi, Turquli, qarTuli, evropuli da aziuri turistuli gzamkvlevebisaTvis vizualuri masalisa da teqstebis momzadebas, aseve, seminarebisa da leqciebis organizebas sastumros administratorebisa da Zeglebisa da muzeumebis siaxloves mcxovrebTaTvis. es SeiZleba ganxilul iqnas sawyisad qarTulTurquli TanamSromlobisa, romelic miznad isaxavs ara mxolod kulturuli turizmis kargad aRWurvili da organizebuli programis realizacias, aramed masobrivi turizmis uaryofiTi efeqtebis Semcirebasac.

maka dvaliSvili

xelovnebis saerTaSoriso centri. saqarTvelo kulturuli proeqtebi ganviTarebisaTvis kultura istoriis manZilze aRiqmeboda da ganixileboda, rogorc elitaruli - "gansakuTrebuli" sazogadoebrivi fenis Semoqmedebis an "moxmarebis" sferod. saxelmwifos mier subsidirebuli sfero, naklebad aRiqmeboda ekonomikurad momgebian saqmianobad an biznesad (Tu ar CavTvliT xelosnobas). kulturisadmi msgavsi damokidebuleba dResac grZeldeba da ZiriTdad Semoifargleba esTetikuri Rirebulebis miniWebiT da gansxvavebiT dasavleTis qveynebisagan moklebulia ekonomikur xedvas. sabazro ekonomikis pirobebSi cneba - kultura ekonomikuri ganviTarebis datvirTvasac iZens. amis naTeli maCvenebelia dasavleT evropisa da aSS-s praqtika, sadac kulturuli produqciis saSemosavlo wili procentulad utoldeba da, xSir SemTxvevaSi, aRemateba, magaliTad warmoebis iseT sferoebs, rogoricaa mcire biznesi, turizmi, rewva, rom araferi vTqvaT kinomatografiaze an musikis industriaze. kulturis sfero, rogorc ekonomikuri ganviTarebis erT-erTi wyaro, gansakuTrebul

147

kulturuli turizmi

Rirebulebas iZens iseT qveyanaSi, rogoric saqarTveloa, sadac xelovneba istoriis uZvelesi periodidan dawyebuli, warmoadgens qarTuli erovnulobis, tradiciulobis maxasiaTebels, msoflmxedvelobis Tu cnobierebis erT-erT ganuyofel nawils. sadac dResac, miuxedavad saerTo qarTuli kulturuli fenomenis daqveiTebisa, kulturuli TviTmyofadoba warmoadgens sazogadoebis cnobierebis organul nawils. yovelive es iZleva noyier niadags organizebuli marTvis pirobebSi kulturisa da xelovnebis dargebi iqces ekonomikurad momgebian sferod. sabazro ekonomikis pirobebSi kulturis gardaqmna ekonomikurad momgebian produqtad, SesaZlebelia ekonomikuri ganviTarebis erT-erTi wyaro gaxdes. Tumca, amavdroulad, dgeba mniSvnelovani sakiTxi, sad unda gaevlos zRvari kulturis komercializaciasa da WeSmarit Semoqmedebas Soris. kulturis ekonomika moicavs iseT gamoyenebad sferoebs, rogoricaa: kulturuli turizmi, kulturuli (SemoqmedebiTi) industriebi, kulturuli infrastruqturis ubnebi da yovelive amis biznesad gardasaxva qmnis pirobas am dargebis ganviTarebisaTvis da Sesabamisad cxovrebisunarianobis SenarCunebisaTvis. (aq gansakuTrebiT unda aRiniSnos, rom es exeba mxolod utilitaruli xelovnebis dargebs, da aramc da aramc natif xelovnebas). da bolos, ZiriTadi da mniSvnelovani postulatia, rom kulturis ekonomikur, "gamoyenebad" produqtad gardaqmna, ar unda emuqrebodes mis mxatvrul Rirebulebas. Sesabamisad, unda ganisazRvros da SemuSavdes mxatvruli Rirebulebis dacvis meqanizmebi. magalaTad dRes, rodesac saqarTveloSi kulturuli turizmi ganviTarebis sawyis safexurzea, Tavidanve iqnas Seswavlili da gaTvaliswinebuli stiqiuri turizmis uaryofiTi Sedegebi, kerZod, iseTi magaliTebi, rogoric veneciaa, sadac turizmi damangrevel zemoqmedebas axdens adgilobriv kulturul memkvidreobaze da infrastruqturaze. moxseneba Seicavs mosazrebebs da zemoaRniSnuli problematikis analizs da warmoadgens saqarTveloSi kulturis menejmentis ganviTarebis SesaZleblobebs.

meri qei judi

arqiteqturuli da kulturuli memkvidreobis konservacia. aSS qarTuli kulturuli memkvidreoba, rogorc ekonomikuri resursi moxsenebis mizania warmoaCinos qarTuli kulturuli memkvidreobis marTvis da samarTlebrivi dacvis dadebiTi roli adgilobrivi ekonomikis ganviTarebaSi. imis garda, rom adgilobrivi kulturuli memkvidreobis dacvas sasicocxlo mniSvneloba eniWeba erovnuli istoriisa da TviTmyofadobis momavali TaobebisaTvis SesanarCuneblad, is, aseve, mniSvnelovan resurss warmoadgens. Zveli Tbilisi, Sua saukuneebis eklesiebi da freskebi, vansa da dmanisSi bolodroindeli arqeologiuri aRmoCenebi, svaneTis koSkebi, bolo xanebSi aRiarebuli modernistuli xelovneba da sxva - samomavlod saqarTvelos ekonomikuri ganviTarebis SesaZleblobaTa momcvelia. qarTuli kulturuli memkvidreoba, mis Seucvlel faseulobebTan erTad, aseve warmoadgens mniSvnelovan ekonomikur resurss kulturuli turizmis xelSewyobisaTvis, adgilobrivi biznesis mxardaWerisaTvis, urbanuli gamococxlebisaTvis, dasaqmebis SesaZleblobebisaTvis, sakuTrebis Rirebulebis zrdis da ucxouri investiciebis waxalisebisaTvis. ucxouri investicia, Tavis mxriv, ekonomikuri ganviTarebis procesSi qmnis qveynisaTvis sasicocxlo mniSvnelobis sagadasaxado bazas. qarTuli kulturuli memkvidreobis sami Zegli Seyvanilia iuneskos msoflio memkvidreobis siaSi. es potenciali mraval sxva qarTul Zeglsac gaaCnia. axlaxans, 2006 wels, timoTesubnis RmrTismSoblis eklesiis restavraciam evropis sabWos oqros

148

kulturuli turizmi

medali - evropa nostras jildo miiRo. saerTaSoriso aRiarebis kidev erTi sabuTia isic, rom saqarTvelo iyo pirveli qveyana, romelsac gamorCeuli kulturuli memkvidreobis safuZvelze, 1998 wels msoflio bankma ekonomikuri ganviTarebis sesxi gamouyo. moxsenebaSi konkretuli qarTuli magaliTebis ganxilvamde, warmodgenili iqneba saerTaSoriso kvlevebis magaliTebic, Tanmdev finansur monacemebTan erTad, rac kidev erTxel warmoaCens kulturuli memkvidreobis ekonomikurad momgebian da, amavdroulad, mdgrad resursad qcevis SesaZleblobas. Tumca aRsaniSnavia, rom es ar gulisxmobs resursebis eqpluatacias an mdgradi ganviTarebis principebis gaTvaliswinebis gareSe turizmis xelSewyobas. samagaliTo kvlevebSi ganxilul iqneba Semdegi: ·memkvidreobiTi turizmi: turizmis wvlili qveynebis mTlian Sida produqtSi (mSp): magaliTad, turizmis wili kviprosis mSp-s 25 %-ia, maltaze _ 20% mSp, germaniSi _ 8% mSp, xolo safrangeTSi _ 7% mSp. ·adgilobrivi biznesis mxardaWera: makaos calobiTi gayidvis Semosavlis 60% gamomuSavdeba qveynis memkvidreobis konservaciis zonebSi. ·sakuTrebis gazrdili Rirebuleba: niu iork siTis mTavrobis mier gamoqveynebuli ekonomikuri dokumentacia niu iork siTiSi istoriul RirsSesaniSnaobaTa raionSi nagebobebis sakuTrebis Rirebulebis zrdis Sesaxeb. ·dasaqmebis SesaZleblobebi: norvegiaSi istoriuli rekonstruqciis proeqtebi warmoqmnis saSualod 20%-iT met samuSao adgils, vidre didi biujetis mqone axali samSeneblo proeqtebi. safrangeTSi sarestavracio samuSaoebSi srul ganakveTze 40 000 adamiania dasaqmebuli. ·mesakuTreTa waxaliseba: britaneTsa da italias aqvs sakuTrebis gadasaxadebis wamaxalisebeli programebi memkvidreobis kerZo mflobelebisaTvis, rac xels uwyobs memkvidreobis dacvas, rac Tavis mxriv, xels uwyobs kulturuli memkvidreobis ekonomikur resursad qcevas. saerTaSoriso precedentebis magaliTze kulturuli memkvidreobis ekonomikuri SesaZleblobebis analizis Semdeg, gamovlenili iqneba saqarTveloSi Catarebuli kvlevebi, romelic xels uwyobs turizmis ganviTarebas da, amasTanave, ekonomikurad mdgradia. moxseneba dasruldeba gadasaxadebis anulirebis da brunvadi sesxebis SemoRebis ramdenime wamaxalisebeli gegmisa da modelis ganxilviT. es winadadebebi gaTvaliswinebulia saqarTveloSi adgilobrivi xelisuflebis da arasamTavrobo organizaciebisaTvis, raTa maT, Tavis mxriv, arqiteqturuli memkvidreobis saxelmwifo da kerZo mflobelTa wreSi aamaRlon codna maTi sakuTrebis "momgebianobis" Sesaxeb.

mauren doili, jefri doili

"heritansi". aSS kulturuli turizmi da "Ria muzeumi" turizmi - sxvadasxvaobaze dafuZnebuli industriaa. kulturuli turizmi stumars Txrobis saSualebiT izidavs, rac sxvadasxvaobisa da mravalferovnebis gamovlenas emsaxureba. "didi muzeografiisaken" gza realuri adamianebis da movlenebis Sesaxeb mimzidvel da damajerebel Txrobaze gadis. amis saukeTeso saSualeba yvela personaJisaTvis "xmis miniWebaa", ramdenadac, mosayolad Rirebul yvela istorias, rogorc wesi, ramdenime mxare aqvs. amasTan, inkluziuri Txroba, romelic muzeums ufro sainteresos da mimzidvels xdis stumrisaTvis, zogadad momgebiania sazogadoebisaTvisac, da ara mxolod gazrdili

149

kulturuli turizmi

turistuli Semosavlis gamo - "Ria muzeumis" atmosfero xels uwyobs konstruqciul da mravalmxriv dialogs, rac nebismieri pluralistuli sazogadoebis safuZvelia. "heritans"-ma "Ria muzeumis" koncefcia Camoayaliba imisaTvis, raTa waaxalisos da xeli Seuwyos Ria da inkluziur muzeumebs. "heritans"is xedva "Ria muzeumze" sam ZiriTad princips efuZneba: Ria muzeografia. imisaTvis, rom sxvas gaugo, pirvel rigSi, mis istorias unda mousmino da sakiTxs misi TvaliT unda Sexedo. "Ria muzeumi" eqponatebs swored ise gamofens, rom istoriebs sxvadasxva da erTmaneTis sapirispiro kuTxiT warmogvidgens. Ria mmarTveloba. "heritans"-is rwmeniT mxolod gamWvirvale, inkluziuri da Ria mmarTvelobis mqone muzeumi SeZlebs saTanadod da sarwmunod warmoaCinos nebismieri sazogadoebis mravalferovneba. ufro metic, Ria mmarTvelobis principi aZlierebs sazogadoebas mSvidobiani Tanaarsebobisa da adgilobrivi avtonomiisaTvis aucilebeli praqtikis demonstrirebiT. sajarooba. "Ria muzeumebi" qmnis garemos, romelic gaxsnili da misawvdomia muzeumiT dainteresebul pirTa mTeli speqtrisaTvis. es gulisxmobs muzeumis daaxloebas xalxTan moZravi gamofenebis, skolebis monawileobis, warmodgenebis, dResaswaulebis da internetis saSualebiT. "heritans"-i dafuZnebul iqna 2007 wlis TebervalSi da saqmianobis pirveli wlis ganmavlobaSi adgilze Caatara seminarebi, konsultaciebi da grantebi gadasca muzeumebs rva qveyanaSi, romelTa Sorisaa kolumbia, kenia, meqsika, ruanda da samxreT afrika.

dimitri jafariZe

saqarTvelos turizmisa da kurortebis departamenti. saqarTvelo kulturuli turizmis perspeqtivebi saqarTveloSi

ia Tabagari

kavkazus Treveli. saqarTvelo kulturuli turizmi _ urTierTobebi eklesiasa da turizmis industrias Soris

milan prodanoviCi

novi sadis universiteti. serbeTi kulturaTa dialogi da civilizaciaTa konfliqti saganmanaTleblo/ kulturul turizmTan da regionaluri kulturis evropul memkvidreobasTan integraciis sakiTxebTan mimarTebaSi

150

V SEC T I ON

C U LT U R AL T OUR IS M

C U LT U R A L T OURIS M

Knut Gerber

GTZ. Germany About Economic Effects in Cultural Tourism - More Chances Than Risks? Concerning Georgia as a host country of increasing number of cultural tourists I would have more questions than answers today... Behind the "cultural tourism" in Europe stand some hard facts& figures, i.e. 23,5% of all tourist arrivals are coming from "cultural tourists", from them are more than 31 Mio so called "general cultural tourists" and 3,5 Mio "specific cultural tourists". This gives a flash light of possible consequences for host regions, for their inhabitants and even for the heritage of any cultural resource. What stands for economic effects of (cultural) tourism? Mainly more consumption through more arrivals and overnight stays, That means more tax income in host region including additional multiplication of similar effects for local entrepreneurs in tourism, culture and productive services. Cultural tourism creates working places, in cultural, and in productive sectors. The increased demand in labor force is followed by social and again positive tax effects. Cultural tourism is becoming more important for designing a new profile of a destination. It helps to develop the soft factors of a location, being more and more important for investor's decision making processes and it has also qualitative and immaterial aspects for future living environment. Cultural tourism is working all seasons. That means the location has no peaks in high season and all economic effects are existing during year. Cultural tourism has a share in development of endogen potentials. A region/city will have its own identity which creates an USP at markets, helps to develop cross border tolerance of inhabitants and entrepreneurs activities and therefore creates new business contacts and opportunities. What stands for negative economic effects in cultural tourism? First the commercialization of tourism itself! In case cultural services are given only for profit reasons and not longer for presenting the internal value of a cultural good. To have a maximum in arrivals etc., very often cultural services are deformed to find a much better access to tourist's expectations. But then the identity is very often lost, because of being only a show! This leads to a shrinking local identity with the cultural product and the concept behind. Most relevant is that more tourist arrivals lead to more traffic, to more noise, pollution and other burdens for environment. The attraction of a destination is decreasing. Not to forget the not reversible wear of historical substance of buildings.

Betsy Haskell

Tourism committee, American Chamber of Commerce in Georgia. USA Georgian Tourism Georgia is rich in antiquities, cultural and archeological sites and is a fascinating place to visit. Anyone with a spade who digs three to four meters down in almost any part of Georgia will uncover a fifth or sixth century town or village. In addition, Georgia has a varied and legendary topography, from the highest peaks of the Caucasus range to the desert-like terrain surrounding the Monastery of Davit Gareji. Numbers of unique examples of flora and fauna are found in Georgia as well, but, at the moment, it takes an intrepid traveler to find and

152

C U LTU R AL T OUR IS M

enjoy its riches. This is because for the past 20 years or so, no investment in infrastructure was made. Roads are impassable, signage completely missing, and good hotels and restaurants hard to find. Despite its moderate climate, and great appeal to tourists in search of new adventures, the hangover from the Soviet period has taken a very long time to recover from. One of the reasons for the lack of tourist-friendly investment in Georgia during communist times was because Georgia was probably the most popular destination in the closed-Soviet Union and since people came to visit regardless of the conditions, no efforts were made to enhance their experience. Until very recently, the concept of attracting tourists, building comfortable and safe accommodations, restoring crumbling ruins, or, indeed, providing up-to-date information in languages other than Georgian and Russian was unheard of and efforts to do so were dismissed as a waste of time. However, with the Rose Revolution and the changes in attitude and priorities wrought by the President, new investment in infrastructure for attracting tourism has become a priority. The medieval walled town of Signaki received over 30 million Lari in investment in electricity, water and sewage lines, completely new streets and tiled roofs were installed, and the town is now absolutely beautiful, though the villagers have yet to understand the need for shops, good restaurants and cafes. A similar investment is being made in the old part of Kutaisi . Because of government low-interest loan initiatives, new hotels are popping up all over, but still, the concept of shops, accessible restaurants and cafes hasn't taken hold. A recently completed Strategic Plan, developed with a TDA grant from the US Government to the Department of Tourism and Resorts, lays out the problems, along with a strategy to address them. We are all hoping that the necessary resources will be allocated by the Government of Georgia to solve these problems.

Paata Shanshiashvili

International Technical Assistance Program of U.S. Department of the Interior. Georgia Advancement of Georgia's Tourism Competitiveness through Building of Protected Areas Network Georgia is a small mountainous country with a population of few million people. Its landscapes include a rich freshwater hydrographic network, foothills, mountain forests, sub-alpine and alpine meadows, glaciers, the snowcapped mountain peaks of the Greater and Lesser Caucasus, which rise five thousand meters above see level, the Black Sea coast, wetlands, the humid lowland forests of western Georgia, and the arid steppe and semi-deserts of southeastern Georgia. Forests cover 40% of the country. The varied biogeographic conditions contribute to the species richness, high level of endemism and global rarity of major habitat types, as well as to the uniqueness and exceptionally high diversity of historic-cultural landscapes Creating a protected areas system, focused on conservation of the nation's natural and cultural legacy, is a crucial part of the overall sustainable development of the country. It provides the nation with numerous ecological and economic benefits, as well as offers international and local visitors attractive and aesthetically-pleasant educational, recreational and adventure opportunities. The National Protected Areas legislation provides legal framework for designation of 6 national and 3 global categories (World Heritage Site, Ramsar site and Biosphere Reserve). The national protected areas categories mainly are managed for: · Strict protection - Strict Nature Reserve / Wilderness Area · Ecosystem conservation and recreation - National Park · Conservation of natural features - Natural Monument · Conservation through active management - Habitat / Species / Management Area · Cultural Landscape conservation and recreation - Protected Landscape · Sustainable use of natural ecosystems ­ Multiple Use Protected Area Visitor use is a primary objective for National Park, Natural Monument and Protected Landscape. Tourism activities are applicable for the Managed Nature Reserve and Multiple Use protected areas Categories.

153

C U LT U R A L T OURIS M

Provisions for formal educational opportunities are the secondary objective of a Strict Nature Reserve category. In protected areas, besides offering basic services related to accommodation, sustenance, and safety, visitors are provided with unique opportunities for enjoyment, inspiration of material and nonmaterial values of natural and cultural resources, as well as adventure and recreation prospects. Visitor infrastructure development is guided by the principles of sustainable design and environmental ethics. Inventory and adequate use of nonmaterial resources are also critical parts of the process.

Niko Kvaratskhelia

Tbilisi State Economic University. Georgia Tendencies and Prospects of Cultural Tourism Development in Georgia Cultural tourism development in Europe has been remarkable since 1980s. The reason for this is twofold: On one hand, a large number of international conferences and congresses have taken place in the region, and on the other hand, recommendations proposed by scholarly studies of tourism issues have been implemented, consumer demands have been considered and the travel thematic refined. As a result, tour operator offerings are comprised of a selection of better attractions. Success of the contemporary tourism industry has depended on three major conditions: Improvement of the well-being of the people: The annual income of citizens of the industrial European countries increased 25-fold after World War 2. Purchasing capacity has also increased. Standard of living has improved, influencing the planning of free time. People can spare more money and time for rest and travel. Increasing time resource: During the above mentioned period, work duration decreased in Europe, and correspondingly people have more free time. The number of day-offs and holidays during the course of year are quite large. People have more free time. This tendency will continue, reaching its maximum level in 2020. Five day work-weeks with two day-offs, not including national and religious feasts and vacations, all result in more free time, which should be properly planned and spent. Keenness on traveling: This is an issue for individual study as it is not a uniform process. What one can say for sure is that the attraction of Europeans to tourism is obvious and mass tourism increases. Scholars consider that this was stimulated by the development of road infrastructure and communications. It should be noted that the tourism business was ready for mass demands and has proposed a wide variety of services. The economics of tourism results of this variety of offerings. Cultural tourism envelops both humanitarian and business spheres, and is one of the best prospects among the tourism segments for economical and cultural development of the territorial entity. Many countries consider its development a priority. Georgia is among these countries. It has significant resources to encourage tourism development: a picturesque environment, mild climate, diverse landscapes, national parks, resort zones, mountain resorts famous for mineral spas, and a great number of historical monuments found at every step. Five out of twelve thousand monuments are under protection of state,four of them are enrolled on UNESCO's list of World Heritage sites. Proposed services should be adequate to meet the region's the existing potential. Unfortunately, it must be noted that the number of successful tourism operators currently does not exceed a dozen. Among the reasons for the industry's unmet potential, the following should be taken into consideration: 1. Cultural tourism routes in Georgia, as a rule, are restricted to pre-selected sites. They follow the routes already paved by different tourism firms. All are reluctant to introduce novelties and implement innovations. As a result, the firms, and correspondingly the tourists, take no notice of many monuments of interest. 2. The state has not concerned itself with drawing recommendations for tour operators, or supplying them with list of monuments and necessary information. The link between the

154

C U LTU R AL T OUR IS M

state and private sector does not exist. 3. It is a fact that tour operators do not work on developing new tourism routes, as this activity does not bring them much income. 4. Tourism advertising has not become relevant to the travel industry. Nobody is concerned with the quality of presentation materials or souvenirs. Demand and delivery issues have not been studied. 5. Museums in the provinces are not involved in cultural tourism. No plans for their involvement exist. 6. A state program for developing a cultural tourism database is to be launched, which will assist in planning respective activities

Dorothea Papathanassiou-Zuhrt

University of the Aegeant; The IRIS Research Laboratory. Greece Transinterpret II: Heritage Interpretation as a Vehicle for Multisensorial Experiences. The Case of Greece Although heritage resources are the main travel motive for a wide range of market segments, in unfamiliar heritage settings the distant past is beyond the contemporary individual memory and as such beyond the process of understanding. Visible monuments can be understood as time markers, able to move visitors back and forth in history. Such time markers should be managed so as to appeal to diverse audiences. By creating a balance between novelty and familiarity, authenticity and the stories told, a site's past and present can demonstrate its place in the historical continuity. Many peripheral areas throughout Greece recognise the potential to use local heritage for tourism. Still in many cases local governances are not equipped to create autonomously comprehensive tourism development plans, whilst local populations are increasingly anxious to preserve their identity, environment, and natural and cultural wealth from the impact of uncontrolled tourism flows. At the same time diverse tourist segments exercise pressure upon the tourism industry for a variety of experiences and a range of activities. This paper presents the planning process followed to create a series of self-guided heritage trails using the diversity of historic environments in rural areas in Greece within the framework of TRANSINTERPRET II, a multilateral cooperation, under the umbrella of C.I. Leader+. TRANSINTERPRET II develops projects concerned with Heritage Interpretation according to the standards and recommendations of a dynamically evolving database, providing all interpretive projects and services, created according to collected specifications, with a quality label. TRANSINTERPET II reflects an effort to combine community involvement, regional governance and academic research in order to a) educate stakeholders on the values of heritage interpretation; b) manage leisure time for non-captive audiences in recreational settings; c) to communicate to domestic and foreign visitors the highlights of the region's historical and cultural heritage; and d) to create a non-exchangeable tourism image for sites located in rural and peripheral areas in Greece. "The Project HERODOT: Tourism use of the historic environment - Know-how transfer and quality management practices at the regional level": A collaborative network to promote regional identities and cultural heritage A decentralized process within a transnational and multidisciplinary framework, able to guarantee for high-added value tourism products is not necessarily a utopia. HERODOT, a transnational collaborative knowledge network between Greece and Italy, funded by C.I.P. Archimed IIIB, aims to promote the historic environment as an agent for tourism within the partners' areas through the dissemination of best practices in heritage management and tourism planning. HERODOT pioneers a new form of co-operation between

155

C U LT U R A L T OURIS M

academic research and rural development, managing successfully information with tourism value in virtual and in situ environments by applying communication policies with the public in recreational learning environments and interpretive heritage presentation methods. Recognising the necessity to investigate widespread shortcomings and factors of success for the valorisation of local and regional heritage, HERODOT has created a knowledge network among partners to deal with these shortcomings. Ten partners from Italy and Greece, representing academic institutions, local authorities and various partners related to the tourism industry at regional level, share commonly developed planning tools and resources. The network's transnational character promotes cross-sectoral synergies in the partners' areas, influences regional policies, motivates entrepreneurial innovation, and disseminates quality management practices in the Mediterranean area. The network relies heavily on advanced know-how transfer and on further diffusion at regional and local levels by each partner separately. Its dynamism exceeds the program's financial framework, guaranteeing long-term project viability and diffusion of best practices at multiple spatial and social levels. Common development of specific tools and methodologies provide tourism-involved agents at regional/local level with vocational skills in tourism planning, heritage management and interpretation. Experience exchange (transnational workshops and in situ research in five different regions) will elaborate partner specific heritage strategies and serve tourism by creating non-exchangeable destination images. Best practices deriving from implemented projects will reflect the summative know-how acquired through the transnational co operation. These will be further diffused at regional/local level serving as a guide to implementing quality tourism products

Mine Kadirolu

Bulent Isler. Austria Cultural Tourism in Tao-Klarjeti The aim of the presented paper is to discuss possibilities to augment international interest in medieval Georgian cultural heritage in northeastern Anatolia by means of cultural tourism in and around Tao-Klarjeti. Currently the tourists visiting the monuments in Tao-Klarjeti are mostly Georgians with interest in medieval Georgian architectural monuments. But leisurely tours, with a duration of ten days or longer, that include sight-seeing trips to the religious monuments of Oki, khani, Tbeti, etc., can be organized for elderly pilgrims, whereas "wander" tours within the picturesque landscape should be developed for the enthusiastic younger generation of pilgrims with less time but more energy. Another group of tourists are the Turkish businessmen, mostly of Georgian origin, who travel to the Republic of Georgia for trade and for industrial purposes. This group includes prosperous and well-educated Turkish citizens whose curiosity for Georgian cultural heritage must be awakened. Once businessmen, who begin to enjoy the hospitality of the Georgians, the high quality of wine and food and the luxurious hotels, get acquainted with the unique monuments within the wonderful scenery of the Caucasus, they surely will do their best to support conservation attempts in Tao-Klarjeti. To facilitate this, short, (i.e. 5 or 6-day) excursions, starting at the better-preserved monuments in Tao-Klarjeti, extending to the most impressive monastic complex in Georgia and ending at a museums in Tbilis, should be organized. Western and eastern tourists to Turkey, whose numbers seems to increase each year, need to be encouraged to visit the Georgian monuments in Tao-Klarjet. "Wander" tours should be developed along the Caucasus, starting either from Tao-Klarjeti or elsewhere in Georgia, and include some of the better-preserved medieval Georgian monuments. Various excursions, arranged specifically to visit the medieval Georgian monuments, will be indispensable to promoting Georgia's invaluable cultural heritage across the world. The presenters of this paper, while remaining doubtful about the positive effects of mass tourism, especially at deserted sites with remnants, are aware of the advantages that world-wide fame could bring to the medieval Georgian cultural heritage in Tao-Klarjeti. Therefore this paper includes measures, such as

156

C U LTU R AL T OUR IS M

suggesting well-defined itineraries both in Tao-Klarjeti and elsewhere Georgia, preparing visual material and texts for Turkish, Georgian, European and Asian tourist guides, and organizing seminars and lectures for hotel administrators and inhabitants in the vicinity of the monuments and museums, which will be discussed with the intention of initiating a Turkish-Georgian cooperation, not only to realize a well-equipped and organized program for cultural tourism but also to diminish the negative effects of mass tourism.

Maka Dvalishvili

Georgian Arts and Culture Center. Georgia Cultural Projects for Development Throughout history, "Culture" (in particular "Art") was considered to be a field of creativity, and of consumption of "noble" and "extraordinary" strata in society. Culture in the counties of the Soviet Union was subsidized by the government and was almost never regarded as an economically beneficial activity or business (except for artisanship). Contrary to in the West, this approach to culture still continues in Post Soviet countries, where the role of culture is merely reduced to aesthetic rather than economic value/ function. Therefore in terms of the market economy, culture should acquire an important role in economic development. The Western European and US experience proves that the percentage of cultural product income equals--and some cases exceeds--profits garnered in fields such as small businesses, tourism, crafts-based enterprises, and the movie or music industries. The field of culture acquires a special economic importance in a country such as Georgia, with its deeprooted cultural heritage and its tradition of cultural philosophy that has been an integral part of Georgian national identity for centuries. Despite the observed trends of overall cultural decline in modern Georgia, the idea of a national cultural identity has strong hold in Georgian consciousness, which makes transforming culture into profitable field viable. However, it is important to draw line between commercialized culture and authentic art. The culture economy is comprised of such field as cultural tourism, creative industries, cultural districts etc. that fosters an environment for further development of these fields as well as improves their sustainability. (It must be noted that this concerns only the applied fields but not the fine arts). Finally, the most important point is that transformation of culture into a profitable product should not threaten the artistic value of the art. Consequently, the tools for protection of artistic values should be determined and worked out. It is especially true that while cultural tourism is in its early stages of development in Georgia, all negative impacts of non-organized tourism should be investigated. To do so, we can consider the experiences of such cities as Venice, where the growth of the tourism industry has had a negative impact on local cultural heritage and infrastructure; The paper analyzes and presents considerations for the development cultural management and studies cases of cultural project development in Georgia.

Mary Kay Judy

Architectural and Cultural Heritage Conservation. USA Georgian Cultural Heritage as an Economic Resource The paper will establish that stewardship and legal protection of Georgian cultural heritage has direct benefits as a resource for local economic development. While the protection of local cultural heritage is vital for the preservation of national history and identity for generations to come- it also comprises a myriad of resources from Old Tbilisi, medieval churches and

157

C U LT U R A L T OURIS M

wall paintings, the exceptional recent finds archaeological finds at Vani and Dmanisi, the towers of Svaneti, and more recently recognized Modernist heritage are imbued with great possibilities for Georgia's future economic growth. Georgian cultural heritage, in addition to its intrinsic and irreplaceable values, also represents an important economic resource for the promotion of heritage tourism, support of local businesses, urban revitalization, increased employment opportunities, enhanced property values and the encouragement of foreign investment. Foreign investment in turn creates a vital tax base for the country in its continued economic development. The value of Georgian cultural heritage has been acknowledged internationally by the inscription of three UNESCO World Heritage Sites- and has the potential for many more sites to be nominated. Most recently, the restoration of the Virgin Church of Timotesubani received a Gold Medal in 2006 by the European Union's Europa Nostra. This international stature was further illustrated by Georgia being the first country ever to be awarded an economic development loan on the basis of its exceptional cultural heritage by the World Bank in 1998. Before considering Georgian specific sites, international case studies will be presented with supporting financial data reflecting how cultural heritage is both an economically viable and sustainable resource. It is important to note however, that this does not propose the exploitation of resources or the promotion of unsustainable tourism. Potential case studies will include the following: · Heritage Tourism: The contributions of tourism to countries gross domestic product (GDP): For example, tourism in Cyprus accounts for 25% of the GDP, Malta 20% GDP, Germany 8% GDP and France 7% GDP. · Local Business Support: 60% of Macau's retail revenue is generated in the country's heritage conservation zones. · Enhanced Property Values: Published economic documentation on the rise of property values on buildings within Historic Landmarks Districts in New York City, by the New York City government. · Employment Opportunities: In Norway, historic restoration projects create on average 20% more jobs than comparably budgeted new construction projects. In France, 40,000 craftspeople are employed full-time in restoration work. · Owner Incentives: Britain and Italy both have property tax incentive programs for private heritage property owners that support and promote preservation, which in turn supports cultural heritage as an economic resource. After the international precedent of cultural heritage's economic viability of cultural heritage has been established, existing and potential Georgian case studies that generate tourism and are economically sustainable will be profiled. The paper will conclude with proposals for several incentive plans and models, including tax credits/ abatements and revolving loans, designed for the local government and NGO's to implement to promote awareness and benefits for the government and local private property owners of heritage buildings in Georgia.

Maureen Doyle, Jeffrey Doyle

Heritance. USA Cultural Tourism and the Open Museum Tourism is an industry based on difference. Cultural tourism engages the visitor by making difference and diversity intelligible through narrative. The key to great museograpy is telling engaging and convincing stories about real people and real events. And the best way to do this is to give all the characters a voice, because any story worth telling always has more than one side.

158

C U LTU R AL T OUR IS M

At the same time, the inclusive narrative that makes a museum interesting and engaging for tourists is also beneficial to society at large, and not just because of increased tourist revenues: the atmosphere of an open museum fosters the constructive and inclusive dialog that is the bedrock of any enduring pluralistic society. Heritance developed the concept of the Open Museum in order to foster and promote open and inclusive museums. Heritance's vision of the Open Museum is based on three core principles: Open Museography. Understanding others depends on listening to their stories and seeing things from their point of view. Open museums display objects and organize exhibits that tell stories from multiple and contrasting perspectives. Open Governance. Heritance believes that only museums that practice transparent, inclusive and open governance can consistently and reliably represent the diversity of any community. Moreover, open governance strengthens the community by modeling the practices essential to peaceful coexistence and local autonomy. Open Access. Open museums create an environment that is welcoming and accessible to the entire range of museum stakeholders. This means bringing the museum to the people through traveling exhibits, school outreach, performances, celebrations, and the Internet. Heritance was founded in February 2007 and during the first year of operation, delivered on-site workshops, consultations and seed grants to fifteen museums in eight countries, including Colombia, Kenya, Mexico, Rwanda, and South Africa

Dimirti Japaridze

Department of Tourism and Resorts of Georgia. Georgia Perspectives of Cultural Tourism in Georgia

Ia Tabagari

Caucasus Travel. Georgia Cultural Tourism - Relations Between Church and Tourism Industries

Milan Prodanovic

University of Novi Sad. Serbia Dialogue of Cultures and the Clash of Civilization Agenda Related to The Issues of Educational/ Cultural Tourism and Related Topics of Regional Culture and Integration of European Heritage

159

vaxtan beriZis saxelobis qarTuli xelovnebis saerTa g Soriso simpoziumi

Vakhtang Beridze International Symposium of Georgian Art

SeniSvnebi

NOT E S

160

Information

162 pages

Find more like this

Report File (DMCA)

Our content is added by our users. We aim to remove reported files within 1 working day. Please use this link to notify us:

Report this file as copyright or inappropriate

205862


You might also be interested in

BETA
Film_Catalog2007.indd
BC_Old_TB_A4.indd