Understanding Fortress‐Cities: High‐Resolution LiDAR Mapping of Samshvildé, South Caucasus, Republic of Georgia

Examining the Late Medieval Village from the Case at Ambroyi, Armenia

The cultural landscape of the South and North Caucasus is marked by distinct religious characteristics, exhibiting a shared essence typical of contact zones. Within the religious mosaic of the local population, there is a blend of indigenous and imported, deeply ancient layers. Since at the core of people’s worldview are beliefs connected not only with gods or God but also with all kinds of “lower,” unclean beings that do not have the status of God, mythical creatures called demons and spirits, which interfere in human destinies, lives, living among people and transforming into them. In Armenian scholarly circles, the topic of lower mythology was initially addressed by Manuk Abegyan (1865-1944) in 1899 in his work “Armenian Folk Beliefs.” Grounded in Armenian pre-Christian tradition, he labeled this phenomenon as “lower mythology,” present among all peoples of the world, emphasizing the conservatism of thinking. The similarity of demonological representations among Armenians and neighboring peoples, including identical names with some linguistic nuances, was already observed in the 19th century within Armenian scientific circles. The peoples of the South and North Caucasus are primarily indigenous to the region, and comprehensive demonological studies providing a holistic picture of the region are lacking. Based on the above, this study aims to consolidate various theories of the origin of the demon/demoness “Al” and its functions. It also seeks to understand the pathways through which this character spread to the Caucasus, specifically the North Caucasus. The article employs interdisciplinary methods, drawing on existing literature on the subject, field ethnographic research, and information from Armenian manuscripts at Matenadaran (the Mesrop Mashtots Institute of Ancient Manuscripts). Based on the information provided in the article, it can be asserted that Al is a demon or demoness who harms newborns and women in labor. Additionally, Al has similar names and functions among the peoples of the South and North Caucasus. Considering the fact that there are three theories about the origin of Al - Iranian, Turkic, and Mesopotamian (with most experts inclined to consider Al as the demonization of the Iranian supreme deity Ahura Mazda), it is more likely that Al is either an indigenous character in the South Caucasus and the North Caucasus, or Al migrated to the North Caucasus through Armenian and Georgian substrates.

      The history of the crimes committed by the Armenian formations and their patrons against the Azerbaijani people has more than 200 years. From the 16th century, new centralized states that arose in Europe and in its east began to wage colonial wars for the acquisition of new lands. In the military-occupation and colonial policy of the Russian Empire, formed in the first half of the 18th century, the South Caucasus, in particular Azerbaijan, occupied a special place. The military-political circles of the Russian Empire preferred to use the Armenians as an instrument of death to implement the occupation plan. Throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries, tsarist Russia resettled more than 1.3 million Armenians from the territory of Iran (during the reign of the Qajar dynasty) and the Ottoman Empire to the South Caucasus. Hostile military-political circles in 1905-1906. royal, in 1918-1920. Soviet Russia, also France, USA and Great Britain; in 1920-1991 THE USSR; and in 1992-2020, along with the Western powers, the Russian Federation continued to use the Armenians as a tool of death to carry out their dirty plans. The Patriotic War, launched by the people of Azerbaijan on September 27, 2020 for the liberation of Karabakh, not only destroyed Armenian fascism, but also frustrated the hostile plans of its patrons. This purposeful policy of the tsarist government continued throughout the 19th century, and as a result, many Armenians resettled in the territory of Northern Azerbaijan. As the tsarist official and publicist N. Shavrov wrote in 1911: “1 million Armenians out of 1 million 300,000 were not local. They were resettled by us." At the beginning of the 20th century, their main patron in the South Caucasus was the Caucasian governor I.I. Vorontsov-Dashkov. In his letter to Nicholas II dated October 12, 1912, he wrote: “By patronizing the Armenians, who always provide us with great services, we have received faithful allies.” The essence of the destructive colonial policy of the Russian Empire in the South Caucasus, accompanied by national conflicts in this region, was perfectly described by Ismail Khan Ziyadkhanov, deputy of the First State Duma from the Elizavetpol province (Ganja - J.B.). During the discussions on the clashes between the Tatars (Azerbaijanis - J.B.) and Armenians in Irevan and on measures to ensure the safety of the population at the 25th meeting of the 1st session of the 1st convocation, held on June 12, 1906, he said: “They told us Muslims: you have been economically enslaved by the Armenians, they are well armed, intending to create their own kingdom, and one day you will see that you are no more. Armenians were told that the idea of pan-Islamism was deeply rooted in all sections of Muslim society and that one day the Muslims would cut you to pieces. The provocation was carried out in this way.  In February 1917, after the collapse of the Russian Empire, the Provisional Government was formed. By the decision of the Provisional Government, adopted on March 3 of the same year, a special committee for the management of the South Caucasus, OZAKOM, was established. On October 26, 1917, after a military coup in Russia, the Bolsheviks seized power in Petrograd. The state independence of Poland, Finland and the Baltic countries was recognized in accordance with the documents signed by the chairman of the NCC, V.I. Lenin. However, among the countries of the South Caucasus, the state independence of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic was not recognized. The main reason for this was not to lose Baku oil. For this reason, the Bolsheviks, who seized power by force, toughened the character of the tsarist colonial policy towards Northern Azerbaijan. The history of the crimes committed by the Armenian fascism against the Azerbaijani people as a tool in the hands of the imperialist states in the 18th-20th centuries is confirmed on the basis of the facts reflected in archival documents and published scientific works. The cited archival documents and scientific sources unambiguously state that as a result of the use of Armenians by the imperialist powers as a tool for the implementation of their aggressive plans, the territories of the Azerbaijani people were occupied and divided, a policy of ethnic cleansing and deportation was carried out. Acts of genocide were committed. As a result, the people of Azerbaijan suffered heavy human and land losses. The Patriotic War, which began on September 27, 2020 and ended with the victory of the Azerbaijani people on November 8, 2020, within 44 days, along with the destruction of Armenian fascism, laid the foundation for the return of what was lost over all periods of history.

At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, the South Caucasus and Central Asia became a "labyrinth" of world politics, where the interests of the great powers seeking to fill the region with their influence inevitably clashed. This policy continued at the borders of the 20th and 21st centuries. The USSR as a world power, whose global leadership began to erode in the 1980s, disintegrated by the end of the century. The new Russia, in search of its lost equilibrium, unleashed bloody wars in the former geopolitical space in order to maintain its influence. The South Caucasus, with its unique geopolitical position, is a kind of micro-model of the world, where borders and bridges in all these spheres are intertwined in a complex historical and geopolitical knot. In this context, the region is of particular importance as a point of contact between the international interests of Western and Eastern countries. The rapid transformation of the South Caucasus countries from objects to subjects of international relations was the military and political collapse of Russia. The geopolitical turmoil that followed the collapse of the socialist system was in the hands of all the leading geopolitical players in international relations. The new Russia also took advantage of the chaos, hoping to hold on to the post-Soviet countries. To this end, Russia instigated all the conflicts that are still unresolved today. Initially, the US and the West in general did not oppose Russia much in its geopolitical game, there were times when Moscow acted with their tacit consent and sometimes in a veiled form, even in tandem with them. This policy led to the occupation of the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and North Kartli (so-called South Ossetia), where about half a million people became refugees in their own country. The post-World War II world order was shattered, and the powers that created the UN Charter were in no hurry to be guided by it, since they themselves were involved in one way or another. Georgia and the South Caucasus as a whole is a region at the epicentre of the dominant geopolitical currents. The main geopolitical powers - the US and Russia - are fighting over the South Caucasus in order to acquire their geopolitical and geo-economic space, with Caspian oil and gas at the forefront of their policies. The geopolitical position of Georgia and Kazakhstan, of the Central Asian states in general, and their influence on the current geopolitical confrontation prove that our countries have objective parameters that allow them to occupy a special place in the system of global prostate power relations. However, their effectiveness can and should be increased if the necessary structural, organisational and substantive measures are taken. The relevance of Kazakhstan and the region as a whole is determined, first of all, by the growing importance of Central Asia in modern international relations as a point of intersection of the interests of the world's largest players - Russia and the United States. Central Asia is not just a key region on the world map, the control of which will allow major emerging economies (especially China) to manage the global transit of hydrocarbons and other strategic raw materials, and thus influence their economic growth, aggregate power and areas of expansion. Central Asia is a crossroads of civilisations, the control of which, it has been believed for centuries, allows one to dominate the world. The region retains this exceptional geopolitical importance today. Thus, a comprehensive analysis of the place and role of the geopolitical interests of the Central Asian and South Caucasian states in the modern political process has shown that their priority is to ensure national and state security, political stability and fair international relations, while preserving the aspirations of individual countries to control territories and resources of strategic importance.

The encounter of the communities of the Anatolian Upper Euphrates with the Kura-Araxes cultural traditions was a long and complex process that cannot be reduced to the abrupt ‘arrival’ of migrant communities from East Anatolia or South Caucasus. The historical, political and cultural ‘complexities’ embedded in this encounter are best exemplified by the case of Period VIB1 at Arslantepe, in the Malatya plain (Eastern Turkey). We examine at first the ‘structural’ and historical premises of this encounter by examining the Late Chalcolithic evidence from Arslantepe Period VIA witnessing the construction of a monumental palatial complex and the formation of a strong political élite. We believe that the political and economic changes witnessed in Period VIA also generated a sector of specialised herders that could have taken part to a wider sphere of interaction with other communities living in the wider mountainous areas of Central and North-Eastern Anatolia. In the second part of the paper, we examine more thoroughly Period VIB1, which followed the destruction of the palatial complex of Period VIA and that marks the earliest appearance of Kura-Araxes cultural traits in the Malatya region. Period VIB1 witnesses the temporary and reiterated occupations of specialized herders. Though a series of traits of continuity link cultural traditions and husbandry strategies of the Period VIB1 herders with those of Period VIA, the strong Kura-Araxes related ceramic repertoire of the Period VIB1 herders’signals a growing interaction with the regions of East Anatolia and South Caucasus. We suggest that the mobility of these herders could have fostered dynamics of cultural encounter and assimilation of the Kura-Araxes traditions. In the final section, we present new ceramic evidence from Period VIB1. The post-firing incised ceramics from Period VIB1 find close analogies with those from East Anatolia and South Caucasus in Phase Kura-Araxes I. Does not only this evidence confirm direct contacts with the eastern Kura-Araxes communities but the contexts of retrieval of these ceramics at Arslantepe add new suggestions on the ceremonial way in which the encounters between specialised herders from Arslantepe and the Kura-Araxes communities from East Anatolia and South Caucasus might have taken place.

Due to the successful end of the Russo-Iranian war (1826–1828) and Russio-Turkish war (1828-1829), the Russian government began to encourage the resettlement of Armenians to newly obtained “Russian” lands in the South Caucasus. The Russian Empire’s policy was to force out the numerous local Turkish population with the help of the Christian minority (Armenians) as they considered the former unreliable. Resettling Armenians implied various political and economic purposes, but, ultimately, it overlapped with the desire to christianize the region, which was carried out not only for the sake of pure religion but also in order to increase the loyal population on the Muslimdominated frontiers. The geopolitical consideration, the expansion into Qajar Iran and Ottoman domains, was the important factor in this regard. Thus, Christians, mainly Armenians, living in Qajar Iran were given the right to get Russian citizenship. Numerous resettlement campaigns throughout the 19th century led to the radical transformation of the South Caucasus, especially the territory of Irevan and Karabakh khanates. Thus, demography was gradually turning into a political instrument. This policy implementation resulted in the mass resettlement of Armenians onto the South Caucasus lands within a very short period of time. So the ethnic composition of this area was inexorably changing in favor of Armenians due to the artificial increase of Armenians in the “Armenian oblast” together with squeezing local Azerbaijani Turks from the South Caucasus to Qajar Iran and Ottoman Turkey, which was performed by Russia. The following period also witnessed the resettlement of Armenians from Ottoman Turkey. With the conquest of the Russian Empire of the South Caucasus in the early 19th century, there emerged a new political situation. The policy of the Russian Empire aimed at creating a socio-ethnic support in the face of Armenians led to the strengthening of the Christian element in the South Caucasus. The essence of the disputes observed today, its roots go back to those times. Thus, the events mentioned above are considered to be the most important stage in the South Caucasus history, and it is these events that quite seriously changed the ethno-political map of the region.

Model reduction in model predictive control of combined water quantity and quality in open channels

The Second Karabakh War that led to Armenia’s defeat as a result of Azerbaijan’s victorious counter-offensive dubbed as “Iron Fist” was not just a war fought between the two countries, but also a deciding factor of the new geo-political situation in the South Caucasus region. It is beyond a doubt that there are countries reluctant to accept these new geo-political realities that are trying to destabilize the situation and Iran is one of these states. Despite the Azer¬baijani people’s being part of the Islamic civilization and the country’s historical and cultural proximity to Iran, the Iranian state has placed an emphasis on gaining significant leverage of influence in the region, prioritizing Armenia in its quest for a strategic ally. Moreover, on many occasions, Iran has backed Armenian military aggression against Azerbaijan either openly or covertly. Azerbaijan has sought to comply with the principles of good neighborliness, considering the current geo-political situation, instead of taking a tough stance against Iran. At the same time, Azerbaijan has established bilateral political, economic and cultural ties with Iran. Nevertheless, Iran moved to expand its relations with Armenia, keeping in mind its concerns over “the Azerbaijan Republic’s unification with the territories in northern Iran densely populated by Turkish”. From Iran’s viewpoint, Armenia fulfills the emerging task of protecting western and northern Iran from the influence of the Turks. On the other hand, capitalizing on the Armenian community’s political clout in the United States and Europe meets Iran’s interests. As for Armenia’s reasoning, it considers Iran as a country capable of revitalizing its economy and its approach to bilateral relations remains unchanged. Other factors contributing to the strengthened Iranian-Armenian relations included Turkey’s growing geopolitical influence in the region, and Azerbaijan’s close relations with Turkey. Although new geo-political realities emerged in the South Caucasus region during and after the 44-day war, Iran has been attempting to destabilize the situation ever since due to its reluctance to accept the facts. Unsurprisingly, ample evidence is available concerning Iran's cooperation with both Armenia and the separatist entity, as well as its involvement in joint illegal activities in the Azerbaijani territories that were under Armenian occupation for nearly 30 years. Azerbaijan liberated its territory from the Armenian occupation as a result of the 44-day Patriotic War, which led to the emergence of new geo-political realities in the South Caucasus. Evidently, Iran is utterly perturbed over this situation, given that the new geo-political environment inceases the influence of Azerbaijan and Turkey in the region as part of their cooperation. Furthermore, the strengthening of a strategic alliance between Turkey and Azerbaijan and the expanding cooperation and integration in the Turkic world in general come into play. Overall, Turkic unity is an underlying cause of Iran's inability to grasp the current geo-political realities in the region. Iran definitely perceives Turkic unity as a threat. Therefore, it has consistently backed Armenia instead of supporting Azerbaijan, and this is currently the case as well. Although Iran certainly reserves a sovereign right to pursue its own policy and establish close ties with Armenia, taking sides, supporting this country and making defiant accusations significantly questions Iran’s attitude of good neighborliness toward Azerbaijan.

The Talishis are the fourth largest ethnic group in the South Caucasus and the largest nonstate people in the Caucasian-Iranian region. The problems of their ethnic history, culture, and identity are among the topical issues of Caucaso-Caspica. The Talishis are a divided people living on opposite banks of the Araxes River, in the current Azerbaijan Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran. This historical division occurred in the 19th century as a result of the Russian-Persian wars and seriously affected the cultural, linguistic, religious and other markers of the Talishi identity. Up to the 19th c., the whole land inhabited by the Talishis had been part of Iran. Since 1813, northern Talysh has successively been ruled by the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union, and finally, since 1991, by the former Soviet Republic of Azerbaijan (Azerbaijan Republic). These historical peripeteia have resulted in the actualisation of different identity markers on opposite banks of the Araxes River; they are of different relevance in Iran and in Azerbaijan Republic. Accordingly, the idea of Talysh (the Talishis’ ethnic territory) and its status is also approached in different ways among the two groups. This paper focuses on the Talishi identity, its transformations and peculiarities in Azerbaijan Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

In the 18th and 19th century the power of Russia in the South Caucasus was established. This was done through the use of extensive and disproportionate violence. Since the South Caucasus was divided in small kingdoms, princedoms, and khanates, some areas decided to join the Russian Empire voluntarily, enabling them to find an ally against neighboring rulers. Since 1878, the division in the South Caucasus as part of the Russian Empire was a fact. On December 18, 1800, Czar Paul (1796-1801) declared Kartli-Kakheti's annexation to Russia. After the incorporation of Kartli-Kakheti in 1801, the Russians annexed the West-Georgian principality of Mingrelia in December 1803 and forced King Solomon II of Imereti to accept Russian sovereignty in 1804. In 1812 Guria became part of the Russian Empire. The mountainous region of Svanetia was the last major part of present-day Georgia to be incorporated into Russia, in 1858.Keywords: Georgia; Guria; Kartli-Kakheti; khanates; Russian Empire; South Caucasus; Svanetia

The article is dedicated to Islamism and its specific forms of manifestation in the South Caucasus (in Georgia and Azerbaijan Republic in particular). Making no attempt to a full-scale coverage of the subject, the author aims at identifying and displaying the specific targets of a complex study of Islamism, indicating its primary and secondary geographic, social and other points, as well as specifying the basic tendencies for each point thus identified. A special attention is paid to the Internet forums and blogs as more relevant sources for specifying the lines of conflict within diverse trends of Islam and Islamism in the South Caucasus.

Nature conservation has a long tradition in the South Caucasus, a region with very high biodiversity. Alongside century old nature reserves (NR) in Azerbaijan and Georgia, two new transboundary national parks (NP) have recently been created in Armenia and Georgia. All of these protected areas exert an influence on the local populations, which use land located inside or in proximity to these areas. To investigate the impact of protected areas on the local populations, we conducted a qualitative study close to two neighbouring, historical NRs in Georgia (Lagodekhi) and Azerbaijan (Zaqatala), and close to the two new transboundary NPs in Armenia (Lake Arpi) and in Georgia (Javakheti). We collected the opinions of the local populations, local administrations, and environmental NGOs regarding the impact of protected areas on the livelihoods of the local populations and investigated whether the local populations developed strategies for dealing with these impacts. Results show that the land use restrictions entailed by protected areas cause conflicts of interests between the goals of conservation and those of the local populations on the one hand, and competition between different local groups with regard to scarce resources such as pastures on the other hand. These land use restrictions are due to the land use regulations of the protected areas and concern the use of pastures and forests. All sorts of tourism could provide a possible solution to settle conflicts and to increase incomes.

History helps us to create a wider picture of the reality in which the South Caucasus exists now. That is why we are going to discover the influence of the Russian Imperial and Soviet eras on the states in the region and identify the causality of foreign policy relations between Russia and the South Caucasian states. The main question is why neither Russia nor any of the individual South Caucasian states succeeded in developing an effective strategy towards each other despite their shared borders in the Russia-Azerbaijan and Russia-Georgia cases and being a proclaimed strategic partner in the case of Armenia? How did the Soviet period influence the current state of relations between Russia and the South Caucasian states? Those are the issues analyzed in this paper. International relations in the South Caucasus are convoluted because of their rich and complicated past, among other things. Over the centuries, interstate relations inside the region developed in unpredictable directions. Georgia was a real partner for Russia in the conquest of the Caucasus in the 19th century. Yet, since 1991, relations between Russia and Georgia have been tense at best. The proclaimed secular states of Azerbaijan, though mainly Shia, and Turkey, which is mostly Sunni, are now solid allies, whereas Armenia enjoys a relationship of trust with the Islamic Republic of Iran. Turkey, Iran, and Russia are still the main external players in the region though they have, to some extent, even become “domesticated”. Except for a brief period of turmoil during the Bolshevik Revolution and the ensuing Russian Civil War, the entire Caucasus remained within the Russian sphere of influence until the collapse of the Soviet Union. Even now Russia continues to play a significant role in economy, energy and security policy in the South Caucasus.

Building on the incipient institutions of the Russian empire, the Soviet Union produced the largest school of classical archaeology beyond the Euro-American academy. This article presents the intellectual history of classical archaeology in one part of this vast Russo-Soviet sphere, the South Caucasus. Although sharing a common historical framework with the discipline as practiced in the West, classical archaeology in the South Caucasus was founded and developed on rather different grounds. This paper probes the beginnings, and subsequent institutionalization, of antichnaia arkheologiia, or ancient archaeology, from the 19th century until the present, providing a regional account in the decades before World War II, followed by a more focused analysis of developments in the Republic of Armenia in the subsequent decades. The purpose of this historical anthropology of the discipline is twofold: to detail the workings of an archaeological tradition in a part of the world that, since the collapse of the Iron Curtain, increasingly has become an area of interest to Western scholars; and to denormalize our own disciplinary culture and consider what (if any) lessons might be learned from a classical tradition alternative to the one in which Western scholars have been enculturated.

As is known, the Caucasian mega-region has been an area from time immemorial, dominated by significant military and political forces. At the end of the 18th – beginning of the 19th centuries, both the South Caucasus and Eastern Anatolia became the scene of fierce confrontations between the Russian, British, French, Ottoman and Qajar empires. Already at the beginning of the 19th century, Romanov's Russia pursued an active occupation policy in the South Caucasus, where it faced serious resistance from the High Porte and the Qajars. In addition, the British and French governments, concerned about the advance of the Romanovs to transit channels passing through the Middle East and connecting Europe with rich sources of raw materials and markets of Asian countries, actively intervened in this struggle and in every possible way incited the Tehran and Istanbul courts to go to war with Russia. In general, reviewing the existing socio-economic and political situation in the South Caucasus in the second half of the 18th – early 19th centuries, one can come to the conclusion that during this period there was an unceasing increase in the influence of tsarist Russia, which every year tried in every possible way to expand and tighten its military political statement in the region, at the same time there was a gradual decline in the role and influence of the two southern neighbors of this region – the Ottoman and Qajar states, which for a long time were the main arbiters of political destinies in the South Caucasus. Already at the beginning of the 19th century, hegemonic superiority in this Caucasian region was gradually concentrated in the hands of the Romanovs, and tsarist Russia turned into that military-political center that became the long-term arbiter of the fate of local peoples and nationalities. The leading European powers – France and Great Britain only aspired to become the main masters of the military-political situation in this strategic region. But the remoteness of the South Caucasus from Western Europe, the absence of adjacent territories and common borders forced both London and Paris to stake on Tehran and Istanbul, to try to achieve their goals in this region through the hands of the Ottoman and Qajar military and political forces.