Abstract
A central component of any national imaginary is the extent to which it is or can be made marketable and consumable by audiences within and outside of the borders of the territorial state. Physical and symbolic delimitation of the “homeland” – in 2- and 3-D, on the ground and on maps, in speech and in individual thought processes - facilitates a certain degree of intra-group solidarity and out-group wariness. After expanding upon the theoretical utility of the concept of the national imaginary, the author examines the role played by the “ultimate toponym”, that of the bounded and institutionalized nation-state, in reifying dominant national imaginaries in Georgia and Azerbaijan. A further aim of this article is to demonstrate the ways that popular and elite-centric conceptions of Azerbaijani and/or Georgian nation-hood stymie Georgian Azeri-Turks’ abilities to imagine alternate forms of identification and belonging, using the phantom territory of “Borchali” as a key example.
Highlights
The toponyms of Sakartvelo/Georgia and Azerbaycan/Azerbaijan represent far more than placeholders on maps, stamps within passports, or terms embedded within pieces of legislation
By comparing and contrasting discursive accounts of “Borchali”– a historical territory situated at the crossroads of the Georgian, Azerbaijani, and Armenian territorial states – stemming from actors and audiences in Georgia and Azerbaijan, this paper seeks to answer the following query: How do ultimate toponyms, as facilitative and integrative aspects of national imaginaries, The ‘ultimate toponym’ and national imaginaries in Georgia and Azerbaijan
Elvir Hasanoglu, social activist and schoolteacher, states, if we look at history, this place was Borchali. [...] these lands later became a part of Georgia
Summary
The toponyms of Sakartvelo/Georgia and Azerbaycan/Azerbaijan represent far more than placeholders on maps, stamps within passports, or terms embedded within pieces of legislation. These key toponyms represent two bounded territorial states, their populations, and the socio-cultural thread that stitches both together. Such collective imaginings and their socio-cultural, geo-political, and narrative moorings constitute the focus of this paper. Dominant understandings of “Borchali” as either threatening or supporting the ultimate toponyms and imaginaries of Sakartvelo/Georgia and Azerbaycan/Azerbaijan inhibit members of Georgia’s largest minority grouping, Georgian Azeri-Turks, from credibly imagining alternative forms of social identification within Sakartvelo/Georgia and apart from Azerbaycan/Azerbaijan
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
