The Formation of an Ethnic Substrate: Reconstruction of Western Scientific Thought and Its Relation to Proto-Kartvelian (Georgian) Tribes

Abstract

The Kartvelian (Georgian), also known as the Proto-Kartvelian or Iberian-Colchic tribes, are a group of related ethnic groups that inhabited the central and western parts of Transcaucasia and formed the basis for the formation of the Caucasoid race and, in particular, the Georgian nation. In ancient times, they included the Colchians, Taokhs, Moskhs, Saspirians, Khalibs, Muskhes, and Tubals. The largest sub-ethnic groups that have preserved related languages ​​are the Svans, Mingrelians, Laz, and Kartlians. The adoption of Christianity and its declaration as the state religion (4th century) contributed to the ethnogenesis of the Georgian nation.

The available anthropological, ethnographic, and textual data on the epistemological,1 ontological,2 and political problems of ethnicity are scarce. Nevertheless, a unified approach to ethnicity is being signi­ficantly refined.3 Ethnicity is a mental construct, used to identify oneself or others as belonging to a group of common descent, united by a common origin, culture, language, historical memory and territory.

From the point of view of any modern social science concept of ethnicity, it is extremely difficult to attempt to trace the ethnic origins of the Proto-Kartvelian tribes back to the distant past, since the limited amount of archaeological data does not allow for conclusions. We cannot identify ethnic groups in distant prehistory, much less connect these groups with modern cultural or biological descendants. The mixing of race, language, and culture is constantly taking place, although these objects/processes of research do not proceed consistently enough, and the coincidences are not regular enough to allow us to draw valid inter­pre­tations. Only where these variables are considered independently, separately, and are found to be con­sistent, can we consider the concept of ethnic culture as a direct analogue of ethnicity with the preservation of the group. It cannot be assumed that such a self-denoting entity has simple material correlates or even polythetic4 features that distinguish it from similar neighboring entities. Ethnoarchaeologists have not discovered regularities in material culture that would allow us to distinguish symbols with ethnic significance, because every symbol can be assigned different meanings, and the analysis of ethnic origin is impossible outside the context of a single case study. A unified interdisciplinary approach is needed to establish the proto-ethnic world.

These methodological and epistemological shortcomings require that the study of ethnicity should have access to the mental constructs assigned to material culture. This is only possible where archaeological data are supplemented by linguistic, ethnohistorical, or ethnoarchaeological information. Moreover, since both ethnic and cultural affiliations change, we cannot expect that established correlations with respect to the distant past will necessarily be maintained.

1 Epistemology (Greek: ἐπίστημη “scientific knowledge”, “reliable knowledge” + λόγος “word”, “speech”) is a phi­losophical and methodological discipline that studies knowledge as such, its structure, functioning and development. The branch of philosophy that studies the nature of knowledge, its sources, limits, and foundations. Epistemology also studies the structure, functioning, and development of knowledge. Often, epistemology is considered synonymous with gnosio­logy (Greek: γνῶσις “cognition”, “knowledge” + λόγος “word”, “speech”) – the philosophical discipline that deals with research, criticism and theories of knowledge, although not in classical philosophy these concepts are divided: gnosiology studies the “subject-object” relationship, and epistemology – “knowledge-object” relationship.

2 Ontology (Lat.: ontologia; Ancient Greek ὄν, gen. ὄντος “being”, “what exists” + λόγος”"teaching”, “cognition”) is a phi­losophical doctrine that studies the fundamental principles of essence, its most general categories, structure and regularities. It exists in unity with the theory of knowledge and logic. Sometimes the term “ontology” (the metaphysics of essence) is used in contrast to the term “genology” (the metaphysics of the one).

3 In this regard, the research conducted by James F. Pendergast (James F. Pendergast 1991, 1999), helps us define the limits of our knowledge about ethnicity.

4 Polythetic (Greek: πολύ “many” + πετέστις “establishment”) – a taxonomic classification in which the separation of indi­viduals, populations, or taxa is based on the characteristics of the majority of representatives of a particular group.