The Science Work
History
Site is for sale: mail@thesciencework.com
Category: History

Ethnography of the Caucasus and its social organization. Sergey Arutyunov in a conversation with Alexander Formozov



 © Laboratorium. 2010. No. 1: 205-222

TNOGRAFIYA of the CAUCASUS AND her SOCIAL ORGANIZATION

SERGEY ARETYUNOV IN the CONVERSATION WITH ALEXANDER FORMOZOV

Alexander Formozov. The address for correspondence: 10115, Germany, Berlin, Borsigstr, 5. formosov@yandex.ru. formozoa@cms.hu-berlin.de

Sergey Aleksandrovich Arutyunov (river of 1932 in Tbilisi) — professor, the corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences. In 1957 Arutyunov became the research associate of Institute of ethnology and anthropology of RAS in Moscow. Since 1985 works as the head of department of the people of the Caucasus in spite of the fact that both candidate, and doctor's dissertations are defended on the Japanese culture. As the head of department of the Caucasus already on an extent of more than 30 years Sergey Arutyunov directs scientific regional projects, theses and is a participant of ethnographic expeditions to Transcaucasia. Under its edition among other there were collections: The culture of life support and ethnic group (Yerevan, 1983, together with Eduard Markaryan) and the People of the Caucasus. Anthropology, linguistics, economy (M., 1994, in collaboration with Malkhaz Abdushelishvili and Boris Kaloyev). The list of the main publications is available on the website devoted to Arutyunov — http://www.gusaba.ru.

The interview was conducted by Alexander Formozov on January 8, 2008 in Moscow during drawing up the bibliography of the Soviet ethnography of the Caucasus during the post-war period within the scientific project "The politician of identities in South Caucasus. National representations, Post-Soviet society and public space". The project is carried out at Institute of the European ethnology of the university of Humboldt (Berlin). The concept of an interview — Tsypylma Dariyeva and Alexander Formozov, the editor of the text and the author of notes — Victor Voronkov.

Alexander Formozov: Whether there is a summary bibliography on Caucasus studies and, in particular, on ethnographic works about the Caucasus?

Sergey Arutyunov: In Soviet period of the bibliography of such works were published in the North Caucasus. They in few places are considered because each of them is limited to one region — for example, by Dagestan. As for Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia then it is necessary to consider that about three quarters from them were published in local languages. In Armenia they precisely are. In Georgia too dolzh-

ny to be — there is even a lot of because when scientists died, to their obituaries bibliographies, as a rule, were attached. At some outstanding scientists they left still during lifetime, and at others posthumously. And in Armenia, for example, works of these scientists were published in the basic in Armenian. The general list of works, most likely, does not exist, but on certain scientists of the bibliography there even become better, than in Russia. Because the Russian science big, is a lot of scientists, manage to make the bibliography only on the most outstanding of them. And there, if the scientist was more or less solid, then will posthumously make anyway.

Bibliographies of the Caucasian scientists should be looked for there, in Transcaucasia. I doubt even that they came to the Russian libraries because a book-exchange and in general a complete set at us in Russia, perhaps, the weakest link in the humanities. The humanities, in general, except literature need nothing, and they are in quite difficult situation now. People, of course, as are able, compensate for the deficiency of information, but it is much easier to track what becomes in America or France, than behind what occurs in Georgia. Still it is possible to follow Armenia more or less, at least in our area — ethnography, cultural anthropology. At our department quite decent relations with Institute of anthropology and ethnography, to a lesser extent are improved — with the Yerevan university. I go there every year. The employee of my department Alla Ervandovna of the Terr-Sarkisyants1 too regularly there goes. In Georgia there is also Lyubov Timofeevna of Solovyeva2 who knows Georgian and watches the Georgian literature. About Azerbaijan we know no more, than about Mars. In Abkhazia not so much everything occurs, but besides Yury Dmitrievich of Anchabadze3, the employee of my department, constantly there is. And in Georgia occurs much, but we very obryvochno know about it and not really we imagine even what at the moment situation — status, financial, social and political — most of our colleagues with whom we had good long-term contacts earlier. In Georgia much more, than in Armenia, the "turbulent" atmosphere, any innovations which stability of science do not do well.

A.F.: When I was engaged in drawing up the bibliography approximately for the last 50 years and in detail read "The Soviet ethnography" 4, it became clear that snacha-

1 Alla Ervandovna Ter-Sarkisyants is the leading researcher of department of the Caucasus of Institute of ethnology and anthropology of RAS, the doctor of historical sciences.
2 Lyubov Timofeevna Solovyova is the senior research associate of department of the Caucasus of Institute of ethnology and anthropology of RAS, the responsible secretary of the Etnograficheskoye Obozreniye magazine, the candidate of historical sciences.
3 Yury Dmitrievich Anchabadze (river of 1953) — the leading researcher of department of the Caucasus of Institute of ethnology and anthropology of RAS, the candidate of historical sciences.
4 "The Soviet ethnography" — the academic magazine, is founded in 1926. At first left under the name "Ethnography", from 1930 to 1991 — "The Soviet ethnography", since 1991 — under the name "Ethnographic Review".

la of articles across the Caucasus was very little, especially it is not enough across Transcaucasia. But the situation somehow changed, there were new subjects, interest and activity increased, at the same time there was an impression that it is only waves on a surface, and it is not absolutely clear to me what processes proceeded in the science.

S.A.: When I came to institute in 1954, there was already a department of the Caucasus. And though now I also manage it, but I find it difficult to tell precisely in what year it was uchrezhden5. Mark Osipovich Kosven6, then Leonid Ivanovich Lavrov7, then Valentin Konstantinovich Gardanov8 and after Gardanov since 1985 — I managed it in the beginning.

Now on the state eight people, including me, and these eight people conduct researches. However what is written by me, it not researches, is any ethnopolitical essays, performances and so on. The last and, perhaps, my only large research on the Caucasus — "The culture of life support" (Arutyunov and Markaryan 1983). It is quite serious book based on field researches, but after that in the Caucasus I practically did not carry out field work — since then as I began to manage department.

There is Alla Ter-Sarkisyants with her Armenian perspective, Yury Anchabadze who is engaged in the North Caucasus, the Adyghe people and Abkhazians, but cannot finish the doctoral dissertation on Adyghe in any way. Lyubov Solovyova is engaged mainly with editorial work in the magazine though watches what occurs in Georgia, and sometimes a little bit writes. Natalya of Pchelintseva9 who generally began to study Azerbaijan and the dissertation defended on education of children in Azerbaijan, has no communications there. Sometimes someone from Azerbaijan comes, we sit down, we drink on a glass, we talk: "yes", "ah as", "we will hold contact", but colleagues leave, and nothing from them is heard. Sometimes some paper about cooperation will be sent, and we sign that are ready to cooperate. But only no cooperation comes from it, and I not really imagine whether something becomes there in general though. At our institute in Soviet period there was a department of the Caucasus, but he was engaged in the people of the North Caucasus, and this situation remains. Other employees: Zarif Tsallagova10

5 The department (sector) of the Caucasus was created in December, 1942.
6 Mark Osipovich Kosven (1885-1967) is an ethnographer, the historian of primitive society, kavka-

calls, the doctor of historical sciences. Headed the sector of ethnography of the people of the Caucasus from 1943 to 1957.

7 Leonid Ivanovich Lavrov (1909-1982). Ethnographer-caucasiologist. The manager of the sector of ethnography of the people of the Caucasus from 1957 to 1961, the doctor of historical sciences.
8 Valentin Konstantinovich Gardanov (1908-1989). Headed the sector ethnographies of the people

The Caucasus from 1961 to 1985, the doctor of historical sciences.

9 Natalya Dmitriyevna Pchelintseva is the research associate of department of the Caucasus of Institute of ethnology and anthropology of RAS, the candidate of historical sciences.
10 Zarif Borisovna of Tsallagov (river of 1954) is the leading researcher of department of the Caucasus of Institute of ethnology and anthropology of RAS, the doctor of historical sciences.

and Abdulgamid Bulatov11 are engaged respectively in Ossetia and Dagestan. Irina of Babich12 — is more Adyghe. All the same it not Transcaucasia, but North Caucasus. Communications here weak, but are. At the same time there people rather elderly, they write something to those collections of works which we publish. In Kabardino-Balkaria Barasbi Hachimovich Bgazhnokov13, very outstanding scientist became the director of institute. I do not know as far as he will be the good administrator. It seems to me that administration is not its elements.

In Ossetia "The encyclopedia of the Ossetian culture" 14 is published and a lot of things still. Did you see Tsutsiyev's atlas (Tsutsiyev 2006)15? It ran into several editions, and every time the next circulation was snatched away as hot donuts. Because circulation not really big, but demand for such edition, of course, very big. At us the market mechanism is still insufficiently debugged in publishing business. There is a lot of publishers, but they publish any rubbish which, in general, too disperses. It is similar to shop where prefer to trade in beer and kvass, and it is not so simple to find vintage old wines in it because on them a certain contingent of buyers, it is more difficult — marketing is necessary. The same treats also printed materials. Not always the publisher understands that he will be able to earn from this book. Because it is necessary to invest in such edition much, and not really there is a lot of hunters this business to be engaged. And this atlas covers not only the North Caucasus, but also Transcaucasia. Even it is difficult to believe that one person in a year or one and a half could carry out such work. Atlasov leaves up the wazoo now, but the further, the halturny they are done. They turned into magnificent gift editions. [S.A. shows richly illustrated, very volume and heavy atlas on the culture of Siberia where, however, in statement and signatures to illustrations the set of gross actual blunders is made].

And here everything is very solid, verified, Tsutsiyev the good fellow. But outside Russia even some of those who watches literature the atlas remained the unknown though the author presented his model in America at a conference on post-crisis societies in Central Asia and in the Caucasus several years ago.

by

of Interesting things it is published now much. But again I speak about the North Caucasus. And in Transcaucasia, to tell the truth, it is not enough, even in Armenia there is not enough izda-

11 Abdulgamid Osmanovich Bulatov (river of 1964) — the leading researcher of department of the Caucasus of Institute of ethnology and anthropology of RAS, the doctor of historical sciences.
12 Irina Leonidovna Babic is the leading researcher of department of the Caucasus of Institute of ethnology and anthropology of RAS, the doctor of historical sciences.
13 Barasbi Hachimovich Bgazhnokov — the doctor of historical sciences, the director of the Kabardino-Balkarian republican institute of humanitarian researches.
14 It is about the "Folklore and ethnographic encyclopedia of the Ossetian people" prepared at the initiative of the leading researcher of department of history and ethnography of the Caucasus of the North Ossetian institute of humanitarian researches of the doctor of historical sciences Ludwig Chibirov (about Chibirov see below).
15 Artur Arkadyevich Tsutsiyev is the senior research associate of the Center of social researches of the Vladikavkaz institute of management.

it etsyatsya. The Institute of ethnology and ethnography and department of ethnology and ethnography of the Yerevan university are badly financed. Before independent institute was not, but there was a Sardarabadsky ethnographic museum kilometers in forty from Yerevan. It exists as the museum because Sardarabad is a majestic memorial complex, there in 1918 there was a key fight for rescue of Armenia from the Turkish occupation. It is the ethnographic museum. The good museum, but his research associates are art dealers, and they, in general, do not conduct research work.

To the death of the head of the department of ethnography, the big enthusiast, the big scientist, Yury Israyelovich of Mkrtumyana16, my coauthor on many works (some time he was the ambassador of Armenia in the Russian Federation, then managed department again), at the very least there were a department and group at Institute of archeology and ethnography. Now at the joint department of archeology and ethnography archeologists prevail. At institute several directors were replaced. All good people, all archeologists, and there mainly are engaged in archeology especially as Armenia is such region where where stick, you will surely find some ancient cultural monument. There are two ethnographic departments, one ancient and one modern. Modern Levon Abramyan17 — the most talented person not only as the scientist, but also as the artist and the writer directs. Here they are engaged, I would tell, postmodern cultural anthropology of the modern city. The theme group in the second department — Vardumyan's department — was supervised by my late friend Mkrtumyan. Now Obosyan18 Minium manages it, the expert ethnographer who studies such things as oil milling business, beekeeping or agriculture, and does it well, but it is a concrete and ethnographic perspective. Recently, still when Mkrtumyan was alive, the department published a research in several small volumes "Ethnic minorities in Armenia" (Mkrtumyan 2000). And what ethnic minorities in Armenia?! 200 Jews, 40 Germans, 5000 Kurds, 1200 Greeks, here in such spirit, and that all these minorities have a clear tendency to decrease in number. Kurds — the largest minority, besides that it is Kurdish Yazidi, not musulmane19. But even Kurds gradually leave to Krasnodar Krai. They there not especially are also called, but they consider that even the most small business is more perspective than a message in Russia, than in Armenia. The same who graze sheep and continue by it zani-

16 Yury Israyelovich Mkrtumyan (1939-2005) is an ethnographer, the head of the department of ethnography of the Yerevan state university, the leading researcher of Institute of archeology and ethnography of National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia (NAN R), the candidate of historical sciences, in 1994-1997 was the ambassador of Armenia in Russia.
17 Levon Amayakovich Abramyan (river of 1947) — the manager of office of ethnology of the present of Institute of archeology and ethnography NAN RA, the candidate of historical sciences.
18 Suren Obosyan (river of 1949) is the head of department of ethnography of Institute of archeology and ethnography NAN RA, the candidate of historical sciences.
19 According to the last census (2001), Yazidi in Armenia was 40,620 people, Russians — 14,660, Assyrians — 3409, Ukrainians — 1633, Kurds — 1519, Greeks — 1176. Information is obtained from Gayane Shagoyan.

to matsya, but also their number does not increase, and decreases rather — together with the number of sheep which they graze.

In Georgia it is more. But in Georgia the constant perturbations, scientists are in terrible situation. Their finance, do not finance, somehow disperse, unite, recreate. About Azerbaijan as I already spoke to you, I know about the same as about Mars.

And so historically after all in our department were engaged mainly in ethnography of the North Caucasus. Because was considered, and not without justification that is engaged in ethnography of Georgia big, high level, with the specific methodology the Georgian ethnographic school where Georgy Spiridonovich Chitaya20 and Alexey of Robakidze21 and their wives who were, perhaps, larger ethnographers, than muzhya22 competed. Husbands tried to reconcile with each other, but wives every time of it did not allow them. Therefore there were two schools. The Reading school, of course, prevailed. In something differences between them are not important, they come down to purely personal relations. They conducted very many researches on ethnography of Georgia, but almost all these researches are published in Georgian. Therefore even the Moscow scientists very poorly are familiar with them.

Was considered, as in Armenia there is the ethnographic school. It is about Ward Arutyunovich of Bdoyane23 who devoted huge volume — the main work of the life — to the Armenian agricultural tools (Bdoyan 1966). Besides he a lot what wrote in Armenian.

I can even tell about it to you a joke. Bdoyan came to defend the dissertation in Tbilisi. Its text was in Armenian. Local companions at first gave a hostile reception to it and told: "We will refuse! What for devilry why we in Georgia have to read the thesis in Armenian? Why it did not present it at least in Russian?" And then Georgy Aleksandrovich Meli-kishvili24 was the director of Institute of history and ethnography of Georgia of a name of the academician Ivan Dzhavakhishvili. The academician of Dzhavakhishvili25 was not only gruzinoved, he was the largest armyanolog and knew drevnearmyansky language not worse, than drevnegruzinsky. And in general it was the person incredibly erudite. And so Georgy

20 Georgy Spiridonovich Chitaya (1890-1986) is an ethnographer, the doctor of historical sciences, the academician of AN of the Georgian SSR.
21 Alexey Ivanovich Robakidze (1907-1990) is an ethnographer, the doctor of historical sciences, the corresponding member of AN of the Georgian SSR.
22 Vera Vardenovna Bardavelidze (1909-1978) is an ethnographer and the historian, the doctor of historical sciences. Rusudan Haradze (1909-1965) is an ethnographer, the doctor of historical sciences.
23 Ward Arutyunovich Bdoyan (1910-1986) is an ethnographer, the doctor of historical sciences.
24 Georgy Aleksandrovich Melikishvili (1918-2002) is a historian, the academician of Academy of Sciences of Georgia, from 1965 to 1999 was the director of Institute of history of Georgia.
25 Ivan Aleksandrovich Dzhavakhishvili (1876-1940) is a historian, the academician of Academy of Sciences of the USSR, the founder of the Tbilisi state university and its first rector (19181926).

Aleksandrovich told: "Listen, our institute bears a name of Ivan Dzhavakhishvili. If we refuse to read the thesis on the ground that at us nobody is able to read in Armenian, same there will be a shame for the whole world! What right do we then have to bear a name of Ivan Dzhavakhishvili? No, we will accept this thesis". And they accepted it. At the very least with someone's help read, the benefit that in it there were many illustrations. Bdoyan perfectly defended the dissertation, he was congratulated, there was a remarkable banquet, and everything was wonderfully. Such here comical case. Here the words of Georgy Aleksandrovich, the director, the historian, a hettolog by training are especially characteristic: if we are not able to read in Armenian what right we have to bear a name of Ivan Dzhavakhishvili?

But same points also to a certain degradation. In the first half of the XX century still there were people who could read both in Armenian, and in Georgian, and in Turkish, and so and in Azerbaijani. And here in post-war time of such people already practically did not remain. Very much schools stood apart and very much became reserved. And if before World War II these schools, these groups of ethnographers, archeologists and historians had the closest contacts with the Moscow and Leningrad scientists, then after war there came the period of the increasing national isolation. They became isolated in the narrow national framework and within the languages that, of course, is disastrous.

My good friend (and practically I am forced to apply an epithet to all friends "late" now that is natural in my 75 years) Malkhaz Grigoryevich Abdou-shelishvili26, the brilliant anthropologist who had authority on the Russian fizikoantropologichesky circles together with me and Alekseevym27 worked hard as Valery Pavlovich seasons in India. I hardly managed to publish very small circulation some final book on this work. It included, maybe, five percent of material and results. It is connected also with the Indian situation which is in many respects worse than Soviet and Post-Soviet, as for squabbles, leapfrog of directors, financing of institutes and so on.

And so Malkhaz wrote the book "Kraniologiya" (Abdushelishvili 1976), the fine book which should be published not that in Russian, and in English. Because in the world literature here of such compendium on a kraniologiya, the general guide to science about studying a skull of the person, is not present. But to it in Soviet period just did not allow to publish it in Russian! Told: "You the Georgian scientist, you in Georgia work, it is the Georgian institute, desire to publish in Georgian". And it published it in Georgian with a circulation of 2000 copies though was enough books by five or six because, except five-six experts nobody began to read this book.

Or same Yury Israyelovich Mkrtumyan. I gave lectures at the Yerevan university as the invited professor is more than 30 years — from 1972 to 2005.

26 Malkhaz Grigoryevich Abdushelishvili (1926-1998) is an anthropologist, the academician of Academy of Sciences of Georgia.
27 Valery Pavlovich Alekseev (1929-1991) is an anthropologist and the historian, the academician of Academy of Sciences of the USSR.

Regularly came and read some special course or a couple of special courses. As visiting professor I gave these courses in Russian. Armenian I own, but not so to give on it lectures. Recently I saw that it becomes harder and harder for students to understand my Russian speech. Moreover, if earlier I read in Russian, and they always asked questions in Russian, and the discussion between students and professor went in Russian, then now I face that they ask a question in Armenian. I understand it, but I answer them in Russian and if any dialogue arises, then most often it is bilingual.

Yury Mkrtumyan, of course, perfectly knew Armenian and perfectly gave on it lectures as well as two other famous Armenian scientists-ethnographers. Entered this Trinity Bdoyan (the senior generation — 1910 year of birth), Var-dumyan28 (1923 year of birth) and Mkrtumyan (born in 1938). I repeatedly witnessed not only, but also the participant of disputes when Vardumyan, Mkrtumyan and I discussed what Armenian word to ask, let us assume, it to speak as "functioning". Armenian excludes vozmozhnost29 inclusions of international vocabulary. There are several exceptions, but generally international vocabulary is transferred by the Armenian roots therefore, say, the hydrography is "jragrut&yun" — from "jur" (water) and "grel" (to write). That is it is the tracing-paper from the Greek term but which is carried out by the Armenian roots as it, however, partly became also in old German literature. But here a question — how to transfer "functioning"? It is impossible to tell that this "action" — such Armenian word quite exists. As a result found the verb "kirarkel" which forms a verbal noun of "kirarkum". The word "kirarkum" also translated the word "functioning".

In Georgian it is easier. "Function" just allows to tell Georgian, and it will be enough. To tell "to function", it is necessary to think up a verb after all. Well, say, "something, mediated by something": in English it will be mediated — briefly. In German vermittelt. And in Georgian there is no such verb. Assistance or, say, mediation will be "meshveo-

28 Derenik Surenovich Vardumyan (1923-2005) is an ethnographer, the candidate of historical sciences, was the founder and the manager of department of ethnography of Institute of archeology and NAN R'S ethnography in 1959-2005.
29 Arutyunov exaggerates "exclusiveness" of Armenian a little. Armenian, as well as any other, has a large number of loans from other languages (especially from Greek, average and new Persian, Turkish, Russian, and today — English). Another thing is that in the 5th century there was here a big translation tradition when Mesrop Mashtots (creator of the Armenian alphabet) and his pupils began to transfer many Greek words to Armenian (by the principle of a tracing-paper). Purists of language try to transfer to Armenian both "kangaroo", and "computer", and today and "discourse", and is a lot of other words designating the phenomena, new to the Armenian realities, and concepts. But it does not mean that language has some restrictions. In Soviet period many the Russian and Latin words appeared in dictionaries of Armenian. However, today a part of these words is anew translated, but not all translations take root. About the Armenian "linguistic nationalism" and a stump of the translation it is possible to read in the book: Aga1lat1ap 2006: 65-89.

bit". So, the participle will be "gameshveobitebuli", rather long word, clumsy, unusual, but clear.

And here Malkhaz had to suffer with all this international vocabulary. For example, in tables index orbitalis is written. But in the text the expression "the orbital index" needs to be transferred to Georgian. And such words — weight. Malkhaz very much puffed, but made this book — absolutely lost labor because, I repeat, it from the very beginning should be published not in Georgian, and in English. There is also a book "Kraniologiya" in Georgian, equal which is not neither in English, nor in French, nor in one other language of the world. And originally he wrote it in Russian. It was necessary most to translate it into Georgian.

The same Mkrtumyan at the Yerevan university read in Armenian. The same as Vardumyan and Bdoyan. If any new vocabulary, new phraseology was necessary, they created it though sometimes the issue of transfer was controversial, difficult. So all languages of Modern times since Latin stopped being the only language of science in Europe developed. But here Mkrtumyan needed to read the review or history of the latest foreign or even Anglo-Saxon ethnography, a special course. And he appealed to the rector to allow it to give this course in Russian. About English there is no speech, but all literature, say, modern American or British ethnography, are presented in the generalizing books, there are more private works, there are translated works of all these authors. The phraseology, terminology — all this exists in more or less settled look in Russian, and all the same students anyway should deal with this Russian-speaking literature if they write the theses in this area. But the rector refused. He told him: "We have the Armenian university!" It was in especially Soviet period, somewhere in the middle 198^х years.

So when speak about russification and about the Russian domination in Soviet period, it must be kept in mind that in the republics there was just the same local national domination where Russian was the discriminated language. Perhaps, it to a lesser extent belongs to Estonia or Latvia. To a lesser extent it was shown also in Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and partly Azerbaijan owing to small readiness of local languages and big distribution a russkoyazychiya. But in any case in Georgia and Armenia there was such national domination that, I repeat, the rector could forbid professor to give lectures in Russian. I expected nothing else when Yura told that he will go to the rector and will ask to give a course in Russian. I told: "The rector will not allow you it". So it also left.

Already at the end 194^х years discrimination of Russians in Georgia acted in very distinct form, and discrimination of Armenians was even stronger. Many of my schoolmates were children from mixed marriages. Who fathers had Georgians, those had Georgian surnames, and no problems arose. Mother could be the Jew, the Greek woman, the Assyrian, anyone. It interested nobody, time his father was the Georgian and it had the Georgian surname. He was Georgian — all. And here who only mothers had Georgians, those at school carried fatherly (Armenians -

I will hold down or the Russian, for example) a surname. Having graduated from schools, they were forced to forward the certificates on a surname of the mothers, so to speak, to be registered as "passport" Georgians. And then already they without problems went to those universities to which they wanted to come, and did the career. And without it them would try to fail at receipt or to somehow block them further career. Not only to children with Armenian or with the Jewish surname, but also to children with the Russian surname it is not less at all.

A.F.: That is at the university there were quotas?

S.A.: Yes, secretly it were even not quotas, but such position. "It is our Georgian university, and there is nothing to do not to Georgians here!" It was authorized by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Georgia, of course. Such things without sanction of the Central Committee could not be. And the Central Committee of the Georgian Communist Party approved on it from some Brezhnev or Chernenko's secret indulgence. Then very reluctantly admitted not Georgians to the party. Well, Russians still somehow. Armenians with a big scratch — said to them: "And why you will not remake the foolish Armenian surname on the Georgian? Then we also will admit you to the party, and the career will be open for you. And so to you the career will not be". Of course, the top, the Georgian establishment, needed some social support. And they found this social support in the face of communist Georgians who did not care communism and the ideas of Marxism, but which were interested in the ascending mobility and already then were soldered by ethnic mutual responsibility. And as it provided a certain stability, did not cause objections from the Kremlin, from Moscow.

So national schools and in the humanity were very isolated. Take the atlas or historical maps on the history of Transcaucasia, textbooks on the history of Georgia, Armenia or Azerbaijan. If you put them nearby, then will never understand that these books are written about the same time and about the same territory.

So during all post-war period there was intellectual life both in Georgia, and in Armenia, and in Azerbaijan though in Azerbaijan there was no so settled tradition of the Azerbaijani literary language. In these conditions certain trends in views of history, ethnography, ethnogenesis more and more grew ripe at the Georgian and Armenian national historical schools. And today this process only amplified. If in Soviet period Moscow still performed any moderatorsky functions (at least from some stands the communistic heads spoke about historical brotherhood of the Georgian, Armenian and Azerbaijani people, at least some gestures became for existence in Tbilisi, say, of the Armenian theater, the Armenian newspaper), then there is no it now any more. So these schools existed very separately.

A.F.: And during the interwar period there were such trends too? What then was a situation?

S.A.: Then the situation was such: there was extraordinary intensive departure of Armenians, in particular the Armenian intellectuals, from Georgia, first of all from Tbilisi and first of all to Yerevan. And if you take the Yerevan intellectuals today, then will find out that at a half of them the parents or grandfathers grandmothers were born

also began to work in Tbilisi, and then moved to Yerevan. In interwar time the ideas of proletarian internationalism were still alive, and then in Georgia still there was a mass of mixed marriages. But already ethnic separation, expression of Armenians began, and "voluntary" — they left patriotic reasons and for reasons of more rapid career development. However, in interwar time to the Armenian career development in Georgia was not ordered at all, but already then he knew that though in Tbilisi it will not face discrimination, and if that, then it will be not really essential, but in Armenia the maximum preferences will be provided to it.

A.F.: Then such fact how foundation of academies national respublik30 just in wartime, was one of steps on registration of this national elite?

S.A.: Yes, sure.

A.F.: I would like to return to the fact that in "The Soviet ethnography" in the 1950th years there were very few works about Transcaucasia, were always engaged in more North. And interest it seems was not — why?

S.A.: Because was considered that are engaged in Transcaucasia in Tbilisi and Yerevan and there are nothing to poke to us there, there is nothing to compete to us with them.

A.F.: And then this situation changed? It seemed to me that there were certain splashes in interest in the Caucasus. For example, in the 1960th years there was such period when in the magazine the amount of works across the Caucasus increased a little and some things which could not be published earlier, for example about repressed researchers began to be published. And, besides, bibliographies on Caucasus studies were published from year to year. They were, it seems to me, rather full what I, of course, cannot estimate quite. They included works not only in Russian, but also in national languages, and small summaries, comments. That is there was some new interest in the Caucasus? How can it be explained?

S.A.: I would tell that some warming, mitigation of general political climate and thawing of ideological freezing. In the early sixties those small communications which were were just intensified, became possible to speak about some things about which it was impossible to speak before and the people used this situation.

Even not in the 1960th, and rather in the 1970th years the general mobility somehow amplified, from the Caucasian republics more people began to come to Leningrad and Moscow on conferences. Here the fact that in 1964 in Moscow there passed the Seventh international congress of anthropologists and ethnologists is still important. As it was the international congress, of course, the Soviet participation in it was all-Union, that is to Moscow there arrived delegations of ethnographers, anthropologists from the periphery, from the national republics. It was the occasion, so to speak, and a good financial opportunity to arrive to Moscow, to get acquainted with each other closer. And there was such mass acquaintance, perhaps. And Russian ethnographers

30 The republican academy of Sciences was founded in Georgia in 1941, in Armenia — in 1943, in Azerbaijan — in 1945.

for the first time got acquainted or deepened acquaintances to the Georgian and Armenian colleagues and not only with them. Communication went both in congress halls, and on the sidelines, and just on apartments, in houses at the people more or less familiar. After that communications were a little intensified and in the 1970th years continued to develop. Well, say, in the 1970th years I began to give lectures at the Yerevan university and even several times read at the Tbilisi university (the truth, a little, somehow there less interest was shown) and in Batumi. Just we went there to have a rest, bathe, but, of course, went also to acquaintances, met us, met us and there were some friendly relations.

And what occurred in the 1980th years why these contacts began to fall down? Perhaps, the fact is that just in the late seventies, but especially in the early eighties many scientists of the senior generation died and their place was taken by younger scientists who had no such developed contacts yet. In the USSR the last years of Brezhnev — it was time of some deep stagnation, dead it, rotten time. And those contacts which managed to blossom began to fade again: the general situation not really sposobstvat them to development.

A.F.: And in the 1950-1960th years at institute, graduate students from Transcaucasia appeared, for example? Whether there was in it some dynamics?

S.A.: It is not enough, it is not enough. Armenian were and. Georgian was practically not. One-two which were so at institute and remained — Tsulaya31, for example. Armenian there is a lot of — Ambartsum Galstyan32, Haratyan33, Granush of Arakelyan34, they were both in Moscow, and in Leningrad. It was the end of the 1970th. They were still my students, then came to a postgraduate study, but finished it at Tokareva35 in Moscow, at Itsa36 in Leningrad. Azerbaijani were, but it is not enough. After all people from the North Caucasus prevailed — there were many Dagestan, Kabardian, Ossetian graduate students. And Transcaucasian it is not enough. After all they also went to a postgraduate study at the universities. There was no special sense to go to Moscow if equally well it is possible to write and protect the thesis (and the head will not be worse) at home.

But with Armenians special history because both Vardumyan, and Mkrtumyan were not doctors of science. They did not defend doctoral dissertations, was not to it

31 Giv Vasilyevich of Tsulaya (river of 1934) is an ethnographer, the leading researcher of Institute of ethnology and anthropology of RAS, the doctor of historical sciences.
32 Ambartsum Paylakovich Galstyan (1955-1994) is an ethnographer, the political and public figure, in 1990-1992 was the mayor of Yerevan.
33 Zaven Vaganovich Haratyan (1952-1992) is an ethnographer, the candidate of historical sciences worked as the senior research associate of Institute of archeology and NAN R'S ethnography.

34 Granush Sergeevna Arakelyan (river of 1952) — used up

Donna Tamsyn
Other scientific works: