r/Abkhazia 7d ago

How History is taught in Abkhazia?

In georgia we are taught that Apsua North Caucasian people came from mountains to abkhaz land in 15th- century when georgia was fractured and weak. Main argument is that Abkhaz kingdom was feudal already in 9th century while Apsua in 19th century russia are still in tribal system. And also their is no sign of etnic or language difference in abkazia before 15th- century

Just want to know what you think about it and what you are taught. And what are you arguments. Not to fight or say that i am right you are wrong.

17 Upvotes

47 comments sorted by

7

u/Rafsit 7d ago

The "Abazgi" were an ancient tribe and the historical inhabitants of the region known today as Abkhazia. Their name gave rise to the modern demonym "Abkhaz". They are considered ancestors of the modern Abkhaz and Abazin people and were documented by ancient Greek and Roman writers like Strabo and Pliny the Elder. The Abasgi revolted against the Byzantine Empire in the 6th century, and their territory later became part of a larger Georgian-speaking state called Abasgia. 

Ancient Origins and Location 

Ancient Tribe: The Abasgi (also spelled Abasgoi) were an ancient tribe inhabiting the western region of Abkhazia, north of the Apsilae.

Ancestors of Modern Peoples: They are considered the ancestors of the modern Abkhaz and Abazin people.

Writings by Ancient Authors: The Abasgi are mentioned in ancient texts, including those by the Greek historian Arrian and the Roman writer Pliny the Elder, where they are described as warlike and worshiping tree deities.

Historical Development

Revolt against the Byzantines:

In 550 AD, the Abasgi revolted against the Byzantine Empire during the Lazic War and sought assistance from the Sasanian Empire. Their revolt was suppressed by the Byzantine general Bessas. 

Formation of Abasgia:

By the 6th century, their territory had shifted, and the term "Abasgia" came to denote a larger area that included various ethnic groups and was ruled by Byzantine-appointed princes. 

Rise of the Kingdom of Abkhazia:

Through dynastic unions and alliances with other Georgian princes, the Abasgian dynasty expanded its territory and, by the 780s, established themselves as "kings of the Abkhazians". 

Legacy

Geographic and Ethnonymic Significance:

The name "Abasgia" gave rise to the modern Georgian term "Abkhazeti" (the land of the Abkhazians), and eventually to the name "Abkhazia". 

Linguistic Connection:

The Abazgi language is a branch of the Northwest Caucasian languages and forms a dialect continuum with the Abaza language, further linking these ancient peoples. 

5

u/Capital-Wrongdoer-62 7d ago

Okay thanks for answer .

0

u/Mikheil3004 6d ago

3

u/Rafsit 6d ago

Did you looked at the map where Abasgia is located?🙂

4

u/Mikheil3004 5d ago

Yes, North Caucasus. It's even caused by the Green Line. But your ancestors were already living with us back then. Just because Armenians live in Abkhazia doesn't mean the land belongs to them!

1

u/CareToLearn 4d ago

Who said anything about Armenians…?

-2

u/Grouchy_Detective880 7d ago

The "Abazgi" were an ancient tribe and the historical inhabitants of the region known today as Abkhazia. Their name gave rise to the modern demonym "Abkhaz". They are considered ancestors of the modern Abkhaz and Abazin people and were documented by ancient Greek and Roman writers like Strabo and Pliny the Elder.

Can you show me the original sources (in English or Russian) and where (page, line) this information is written?

And why do you assume that the Abazgi people originally spoke Abkhazian, not the Georgian (Kartvelian) language?

3

u/Rafsit 6d ago

-4

u/Grouchy_Detective880 6d ago

Don't understand me incorrectly, but I don't think Wikipedia can be considered as "original source". Wikipedia isn't a collection of scientific articles that can be quoted or used as proof, as anyone can edit it as they wish. My lecturer of History got veeery angry when he saw articles from Wikipedia used as references to something (we weren't even from History or a similar faculty).

When I commented, I expected lines from the books of Strabo or Pliny the Elder:)

5

u/Rafsit 6d ago

Direct Quote from Strabo, Geography 11.2.14 (Loeb Classical Library translation by H.L. Jones, with minor updates for clarity) "Next after the Colchians one comes to the Achaei and the Zygii, then the Heniochi, and then the Cercetae, who are an offshoot of the Zygii and extend as far as the Acharians. After the Acharians one comes to the Sanigae, the Bithynians, the Bechiri, the Zygodes, the Cercetae, the Phoristae, the Corymbi, the Anacleti, the Phthiotae, the Byzeres, the Rhyndacitae, the Armanzi, the Moschi, and the Colchians again. The tribes between Dioscurias and Pityus are savage, and live on the fruits of the forest, using the so-called 'Pontic tree' for their beds, tables, and drinking-cups, and smearing their bodies with oil of the sea-walnut. They are a warlike people, and although they have kings, they nevertheless fight in a lawless manner. After Pityus comes Dioscurias, with seventy communities, which were reduced to a single town by Pompey. It has a port and a dockyard. The Apsilae, the Abasgi, and the Sanigae come next. The Abasgi are said to live on the banks of the Abascus River, which flows into the Euxine. They are a savage race, who worship trees and supply many eunuchs to the kings of Pontus and the emperors of Rome." (Note: The exact wording varies slightly across translations due to textual variants in the Greek manuscripts, such as the 10th-century Parisinus gr. 1397. The Loeb edition is standard, but modern translations like Duane W. Roller's 2014 edition render it similarly, emphasizing the Abasgians' location and customs. Strabo's original Greek for the tribe is "Ἁβάσγοι" [Habaskoi].)

4

u/Rafsit 6d ago

Pliny the Elder, in his encyclopedic work Natural History (completed around 77 CE), briefly mentions the Abasgians (Latin: Abasci or Ahasgi), an ancient tribe inhabiting the eastern Black Sea coast in the region of modern-day Abkhazia (western Caucasus). This reference appears in Book 6, Chapter 5 (sections 14–15), as part of his geographical survey of the peoples and regions around the Euxine Sea (Black Sea). Pliny draws on earlier Greek sources, including the geographer Arrian and the poet Lycophron, without providing extensive details on their customs, appearance, or society—consistent with his encyclopedic style, which often lists ethnic groups in a catalog-like manner rather than offering in-depth ethnography. Key Passage from Pliny's Natural History (Book 6.5.14–15) In the Loeb Classical Library translation (by H. Rackham, 1942, with minor updates for clarity): "The river Abascus flows through their [the Abasgians'] territory and empties into the Euxine Sea. They are mentioned by Lycophron and Arrian. The Apsilae border on them, and then the Abaceni, through whose territory the river Abascus flows, as mentioned above." Here, Pliny situates the Abasgians geographically: they lived along the banks of the Abascus River (likely a now-unidentified stream flowing into the Black Sea, possibly near modern Ochamchire in Abkhazia). He notes their proximity to neighboring tribes like the Apsilae (to the south) and Abaceni (possibly a variant or related group). This placement aligns with ancient accounts of the Abasgians as a Caucasian people north of Colchis (modern western Georgia) and south of the Sanigs or other Circassian groups.

4

u/Rafsit 6d ago

Geographical Position Modern Location: Dioscuria is located at the site of present-day Sukhumi (also known as Sokhumi or Aqwa in Abkhaz), the capital of the disputed region of Abkhazia. Abkhazia is internationally recognized by most countries as part of Georgia but has been de facto independent since the 1992–1993 Abkhazian War, with Russian support. The coordinates of the site are approximately 43°0'N, 41°1'E. Historical Placement: It lay at the eastern extremity of the Euxine Sea (ancient name for the Black Sea), near the mouth of the small river Anthemus (modern-day Gumista River) or Charus, just north of the ancient kingdom of Colchis (associated with the myth of the Golden Fleece). Ancient sources describe it as about 100 Roman miles (or 790 stadia) northwest of the Phasis River (modern Rioni River) and 2,260 stadia from Trapezus (modern Trabzon, Turkey). The city was surrounded by estuaries, swamps, and deltas of rivers like the Gumista and Basla (Besletka), making it a natural port but vulnerable to coastal erosion.

3

u/Grouchy_Detective880 6d ago

Okay, thanks for sharing.

And my next question: What information can you get from the texts you shared, except for the geographical locations of the Abazgi tribe?

1

u/Rafsit 3d ago

The answer is that Abkhazians and the state of Abkhazia do have a legitimate claim on the land that is called Abkhazia in it's forms! And the other thing is;Abkhazians are the native people on the land which is called Abkhazia.🙂

2

u/Grouchy_Detective880 3d ago

Under What information can you get from the texts you shared, except for the geographical locations of the Abazgi tribe? I meant that you can't assume what this tribe is. They can simply be Georgians (ancestors of Megrels or Svans).

Abkhazians and the state of Abkhazia do have a legitimate claim on the land that is called Abkhazia in it's forms!

Read carefully the texts and keep the map besides:)

1

u/Mikheil3004 6d ago

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/D%27Anville._Carte_huil%C3%A9e_de_la_G%C3%A9orgie_et_de_l%27Arm%C3%A9nie.XVIIIe_si%C3%A8cle.jpg

And why does today's territory belong to you, when almost the entire present-day Abkhazia belonged to the Mengrelian? You see, that's the problem. Up to Anakopia, everything already belonged to the Georgians. There are many old maps where you can clearly see that Anakopia was Georgia or Mengrelia!

1

u/LividBumblebee6873 6d ago

Wikipedia is sourcing all its content, so it can be looked up too, right?

2

u/Grouchy_Detective880 6d ago

And did you look them up?

4

u/LividBumblebee6873 6d ago

I didn't, but I also didn't write the comment, so I don't feel I have to. If you are interested if the source is credible than you can check it. It is there

3

u/Grouchy_Detective880 6d ago

I understand your point, and you are right. You can follow the references.

But, in general, you can't trust Wikipedia in many cases, as I can just edit it and write anything I want.

+ I checked sources in shared articles, but they are referring to other modern historians.

I was asking about Strabon. Because, as far as I remember, we don't know much about Abazgi from his work, except for their geographical locations.

-2

u/Mikheil3004 6d ago

"Abasgoi - Wikipedia" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abasgoi#:~:text=The%20Abasgoi%20or%20Abasgians%20(Ancient,however%20suppressed%20the%20Abasgian%20revolt.&text=By%20the%206th%20century%20Abasgia,name%20%C2%ABabasgi%2C%20abaza%C2%BB

On the map you can even see that Abasgoi is not on today's Abkhazian territory.

As far as I'm concerned, Abasgoi is not Georgian, but today's territory up to Anakopia has always belonged to the Georgians.

6

u/Absolutely_Cool2967 6d ago

Abkhaz and Kartvelians are two separate peoples, period

4

u/Mikheil3004 6d ago

Historically, Abkhazians were not a specific ethnic group. Their ancestors ranged from Svans to Tuapse, Megrelians, Abasgs, Greeks, and so on.

6

u/RitsaKudjba 6d ago

Surprised that they still teach this pseudo-theory

6

u/Abaza-6-7-13 7d ago

So you saying that Ingorkova's bullshit tought in schools as history ???

4

u/Capital-Wrongdoer-62 7d ago

Well people here will say that you are taught bullshit. This type of statements serve no purpose.

9

u/Abaza-6-7-13 7d ago

Dude, this is a stupid, revisionist historical narrative that has been completely debunked. Even the most respected historians in Georgia agree that it's nonsense now. Many Georgians, those who call themselves modern, Western, liberal, etc., have tried to prove to me that this narrative is no longer taught in Georgia. So, they're lying, too.

5

u/Capital-Wrongdoer-62 7d ago

I dont know if its true or debunked but what i know is that majority here do not know not this narative and not yours. So it doesnt really affect anything. Mostly its just innertation with which people say abkhazia is georgia.

1

u/Mikheil3004 6d ago

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Yes, almost all of the medieval maps are considered to have many inaccuracies. It is ignorant to think and make claims otherwise.

2

u/Mikheil3004 6d ago

I don't understand you! You claim, well, the old maps are all far too inaccurate and the Georgian churches were built by Absuas. But we're supposed to believe some old stories? That's why it's so difficult to discuss things with you, because you deny simple facts. And why did the Abkhaz kings write and continue to write Georgian? Oh, you were illiterate, but you could have founded an Abkhazian kingdom and conquered all of Colkhetia. The first attempt to annex eastern Georgia, or rather Iberia, came from the Apkhazian kingdom! Well, what do you say to that? And why did you move the capital to Kutaisi? A small Abkhazian people who spoke Georgian ruled all of Georgia?

4

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Typical all same themes answered here many many times. It is all right, I don't expect you to understand anything since you have been thought tailored history in your schools as OPs question indicated. It is not your fault.

2

u/Mikheil3004 5d ago

And what do they teach you in school? Only mythology and the last few centuries of your history. You're just like the Russians; you can only emphasize the last few centuries, since there's no evidence at all that the Abkhaz Empire belonged to the Absuas. Sooner or later, the truth will come out, whether we like it or not. But the fact is that Colchis was the oldest kingdom, if you can call it a kingdom. The Alans, Armenians, etc., came later. And the North Caucasians attacked the South Caucasians or Georgians when we were weakened and fighting with the Arabs, Turks, or Iranians...

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

Okay :)

1

u/Grouchy_Detective880 5d ago

It is all right, I don't expect you to understand anything since you have been thought tailored history in your schools as OPs question indicated. It is not your fault.

I am sorry, but are you joking? I can't understand why you think that the history you study at school is correct and isn't modified/altered, or interpreted in a way to justify the existence of "independent Apsua". Just like the comments on this post about the Abazgi tribe and somehow putting an equal sign between them and you (your ancestors), when, in practice, we don't know much about them.

I have never studied Ingoroyva's theory or the wall in school. I got to know them only after school and have already forgotten them. I remembered about it only when I read it in this sub. I am sure if I stopped people in Tbilisi and asked about the theory and the wall, not many of them would know them.

These are the topics about Abkhazia that I studied in school in history classes (and still remember that I learnt them there):

  • Kingdom of Abkhazia
  • "Life of Grigol Khandzteli"(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_of_Khandzta). When he was travelling to Abkhazia and building monasteries
  • Unification of Georgia in the X-XI centuries
  • War in Abkhazia (of course)
  • House of Sharvashidze
  • There should be more, but I am not sure if I learnt them lately

I searched for a student's history book in PDF to share, but I couldn't find it (only books with world history).

P.S. I have never heard of any historical source, like maps, archaeological materials, records, or other stuff, proving your theories. Only random websites, screens, and (of course) Wikipedia. Probably, they really exist, I don't know, but it is what I see from you (not only this sub, in general).

2

u/Mikheil3004 6d ago

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/94/Abraham_Ortelius_-_Tvrcici_imperii_descriptio.jpg

Only the maps from the last century give you precise information about where the Absuas live in present-day Abkhazian territory. Is it also all nonsense to you that the Mengrelen built a wall against you because you repeatedly attacked them and burned down the villages?

3

u/[deleted] 6d ago

So this is also what they teach about Kelasuri wall?

2

u/Mikheil3004 5d ago

Yuri Voronov), a well-known Abkhazian historian and archaeologist, examined the Abkhazian wall in 1966-1971 and proposed a new date of its construction. According to Voronov, Prince of MingreliaLevan II Dadiani built Kelasuri Walls between 1628 and 1653 to protect his fiefdom from the Abkhaz invasions (though at that time Principality of Abkhazia was a nominal vassal of Mingrelia). Per Voronov's work the embrasures in the wall were made for firearms; he also quoted Georgian historian Vakhushti and Italian missionary Arcangelo Lamberti who both wrote about the wall built by Megrelian princes for protection from the Abkhaz.

2

u/[deleted] 5d ago edited 5d ago

Yeah all this claims are well known but there is no solid evidence that it was built by Megrelian princes. It is most probably much more older than that. You are just copy pasting from Wikipedia. Why don't you copy paste other half? This shows how you handle information. Again not your fault. It is surprising that Education level in Abkhazia is much more advanced.

3

u/[deleted] 7d ago

Damn, I thought it was some Georgian nationalists spreading this kind of information. So it is all institutionalized brainwashing. Thanks for sharing. It is good to know.

6

u/Capital-Wrongdoer-62 7d ago

Its not how it work governments of all countries change history to fit their needs. So what you know is not the full truth same way as what we know is not

4

u/[deleted] 7d ago

Yes but this is a major shift  and that is how warmongers tried to justify killing Abkhazians during the 90's war. And still to this day this narrative is used by people with bad intentions. It was in the early to mid 20th century when such nationalistic narratives were fabricated. Definitely not in 21st. 

3

u/Capital-Wrongdoer-62 7d ago

Well if we speak 90s war. Both parties tried to exterminate each other to make land for themselves. With both using nationalistic ideas for that. While in reality Abkhazia was influenced by Russia to create frozen conflict and Shevardnadze wanted to ilimiante his political opponents with support of russia to establish his rule. As they agreed when disintegrated USSR. If you ask me best we can do is recognize Abkhazia and move on . Trying to reunite will only cause war and terrorism . But majority here want to reuite in peace . And government will never go against such popular movement.

-1

u/MtiuliBichi 6d ago

It is the correct info, idk why you’re so pressed.

4

u/ObjectiveSpecific752 3d ago

I thought that you guys left behind that propaganda-based theory. It being taught by the government is a shame