ეთნოგენეზის პროცესისა და ქართველთა ეთნოგენეზის შესახებ

Abstract

One of the most interesting, complicated and important problems of the humanitarian sciences is to study ethnogenesis of the peoples. This complexity concerns mostly research of ethnogenesis of the old peoples, formed in the depth of history. In order to study ethnogenesis of old, aged ethnic groups, one has to connect together the data of history, archaeology, linguistics (ethno-linguistics), physical anthropology, ethnology, folklore. Among the sciences listed above ethnology possesses some “priority”, because the theory of ethno-genesis is formed in the depth of this science. As for study of young ethnic groups, the ethnogenesis of which took place in early Middle Ages and after that period, the efforts of historical science is quite sufficient. Two contradictory opinions exist by now in regard to the process of ethnogenesis: a) ethnogenesis is a social process; b) ethnogenesis is natural-geographic phenomenon. It could have been far better to name the process of ethnogenesis the socio-natural/socio-geographical process. By the conception of Lev Gumilev, ethnogenesis is a permanent process, which considers that not only formation of ethnos is the process of ethnogenesis, but also its development and disappearance. However, it is impossible to consider the process of ethnogenesis to be a continuous process. It ends when the given ethnic union is formed. The ethnic process is permanent and, at the same time, dynamic, which involves two phenomena: ethnogenesis and ethnic history. The processes of ethnogenesis are accompanied by migrations, often – by rule of one people over another; they go on within certain territory (often, on the border of two landscapes), within particular period of time. From this viewpoint, the levers of statehood and religious impact are of great importance. The wedding traditions are of essential importance – the endogamous ethnic groups are more or less protected from the processes of assimilation. During the process of ethnogenesis, mixture of two or several ethnic units takes place, in result of which a new ethnic unity is being formed (by the way, change of stereotype in behavior of ethnos in new geographical environment was considered by Lev Gumilev as formation of a new ethnos. But we consider impossible to share this consideration). Formation of a new ethnos was also caused by separation of its part from one ethnos, though in such cases the peoples add different linguistic and ethnic superstrata layers (exception is only Icelandic ethnogenesis). Some representatives of Georgian linguistics consider now that belonging of several languages to one language family means settlement of the problem of ethnogenesis. To say more concretely, belonging of the Georgian language to the family of Iberian-Caucasian languages is as if to witness final solution of the ethnogenesis of the Georgians. This consideration has no scientific basis and it does not suit the frames of the theory of ethnogenesis. Belonging of the Georgian language to the family of Ibero-Caucasian languages means only that these languages are cognate languages and that they derive from one proto-language. We repeat that in this case ethnogenesis has nothing to do. The processes of ethnogenesis start after differentiation of the proto-language. Cognate relationship of the languages does not mean ethnic relationship. The consideration is unanimously shared in the scientific literature that unity of the language, cognate relationship of languages and similarity of some cultural traditions does not witness population kinship not only within one language family, but also within one group of one language family. We can name as an example of this ethnogenesis and ethnic history of ethnic groups speaking the Indo-European and Altaic languages. The ethnogenesis of peoples speaking modern Indo-European languages took place mostly in early Middle Ages (the French, English, Bulgarian, Italian, Spanish … people), and differentiation of common Indo-European language started very early in quite another geographical area (by the conception of Tamaz Gamkrelidze and Viacheslav Ivanov, not later than the 4th millennium B.C.). Consequently, the problem of ethnogenesis of Georgians, despite different scientific opinions, is still to be determined (most important research in this field still belongs to Giorgi Melikishvili) and in settlement of the present problem the complex research should play an important role.