In mathematics, the formulaic expression can be infinitely complex, but as we draw the line, the result is what matters. Similarly, what we are today results from our history, but the state of our nation is not necessarily dependent on its longevity.
Dr. Beka Kobakhidze is a Professor and Co-chair of the MA Program in Modern History of Georgia at Ilia State University and Georgian Studies Fellow at the Davis Center of Russian and Eurasian Studies of Harvard University.
There are nations whose “formula” is much shorter than ours, but its result – expressed by their relative wealth, cash in people’s pockets, food in their fridges, and prospects for the future – is much more impressive. We could learn many things from those nations. Why should we focus on the past only and forget to care about the future and education of our children?
There are nations without which world history is hard to conceive. But they are often much more self-critical than we are of our past. Self-criticism is healthy because it triggers learning and innovation, while misplaced pride only leads to stagnation.
Just some trivia. In 1918, only about 25% of Georgians were literate, but in Great Britain a century earlier – almost everyone was. London Underground was opened in 1863, and Tbilisi Metro – in 1966. A lag of one century in a hyper-dynamic, globalized, and rapidly changing world can be catastrophic. Yes, Georgians these days are largely literate, but the world is navigating towards its future based on different innovations.
Yes, we have beautiful rivers, the sea, and a beautiful country, but that is not enough for us to lead a decent existence; neither is “entering the EU” the answer to everything. Our society needs to modernize, transform, and, yes, change. Some countries built in the desert are considerably ahead of us in terms of economy and liberty (take Israel). Citizens are what makes the country, not its nature.
What are the ideals that Georgian historiography teaches us? Great battles, mostly. It is hard to recall any Georgian who is cast as a “hero” in history who died peacefully. Death and sacrifice are valued. Take one simple example: we still lack a proper historical monograph about the extraordinary life of Ilia Chavchavadze – publicist, banker, writer, enlightened landlord – but there are at least twelve books written about his murder.
As a professional deformation, I habitually visit history museums whenever I find myself in a foreign country. Not to see the artifacts, no, but to hear the historical narrative the countries tell themselves, their interpretation of the historical facts.
The United States has much to be proud of in its military history, but this is not what jumps to your eye when you enter a history museum. One sees stories of innovators – considerable space is given to inventors of no matter what – spacecraft, dentistry tools, or refrigerators. Immigrants are given a special mention and often a special exposition.
While teaching in the United States, I regularly meet Georgian students who study at Harvard, MIT, and other top schools. Their studies are often fully paid for by the U.S. government, to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars. They know the value of this knowledge and its worth. But these young Georgians are running away from the country, being chased by prehistoric dinosaurs of science who do everything to eliminate competition, stem modernization and stop any effort at transformation.
Our current government and Russia are preying on the deformed consciousness as we fail to generate an accurate, forward-looking historical narrative. Russia cannot convince us that it wishes us good, but it can convince us that we are better than others, that the West is “stealing our past,” and that Turkey is our enemy in Adjara. With so many dangers, the real threat posed by Russia fades as the background noise and our will to grow and modernize crumbles.
In the meantime, the donors disburse enormous grants to combat the threat of Russian disinformation, but with what? Posters and flyers are printed, video clips are aired, workshops and conferences are held, and StratComs are created. On paper, every grant is a success – the donors and beneficiaries are happy. Yet we are sinking ever deeper into the quicksand of wanton ignorance.
The collective memory cannot be altered with flyers and workshops. This is an effort doomed to failure. The grant money is aimed at short-term results, which must be achieved once the project ends – in several months or a couple of years. But things do not change like this, and taxpayer money is often wasted.
We need a concerted effort to transform our collective memory and bring it in sync with the 21st century, with modern challenges, with achievements of successful countries. So, we need good textbooks, good school teachers, and good university professors.
One cannot write a textbook in one go; nobody can. I can write about the period that I have studied, but I have to rely on others to cover the other historical periods. The truth of the matter is that we lack the basis, deep, high-level studies in every field and about every historical period that must serve as a basis for a good textbook. And even if we had such a textbook, it needs a good teacher to carry the message through. Only recently, I entered the classroom of a Georgian village where most residents are Muslim, with excellent pupils who were turned away from their studies by a stridently anti-Muslim teacher.
A good textbook and a good teacher must come from the university. But it cannot do either today. At some Georgian universities, the pre-historical dinosaurs dominate, forge a tight clan and continue to preach and reproduce Soviet Georgian nationalism. Gifted students do not study history there because being a historian means being poor. And also because the “successful” historians sing hosana to the government and participate in shameful “David Gareji is Georgia!” electoral campaigns.
What can be done? The maths are simple. I spoke with many politicians, including those from the opposition. They are driven by four-year election cycles. The donors are interested in one-year grants. Profound changes in collective memory require 10-15 years.
Historians Must Turn Towards the Future
Our present is nothing to be excited about, and the future is dim. So we borrow hope from the past and go back in history, 900 years ago, to the era of King David IV or Queen Tamar. It is our duty to change how we look at history and how we teach it.
The ruling party and the government only recently tried to stifle civic associations with “foreign agent’s law.” There is every reason to believe they will continue using and abusing history. It is cheap to prey on the deformed collective memory, and politicians willingly turn toward faked history to achieve their ends. Therefore, it is very unlikely that Georgia’s politicians will ever prioritize modernization and transformation of history studies.
Thus we need more public initiatives and awakening of donors: instead of flyers, posters, and other short-term projects, there must be funded a long-term project of rooting the collective memory into historiographical method and fact, opening the past for critical discussion and bringing our past to bear when tackling the challenges of the modern world.
We need to have 20 or 30 modernized and internationalized professors in history who will staff Georgian universities; they will produce books and school textbooks and bring up the new generation of Georgian history teachers.
The US Embassy has been funding book translation projects for years, but history is not among the topics they favor. There are various grants from the EU sources, but often you need to disguise your project as dealing with “democratization” to research history.
History on its own is underappreciated, underestimated, and underfunded by donors and by the government.
A handful of organizations and enthusiasts have been successfully doing their job for years. Take, for example, the Soviet Past Research Laboratory (SOVLAB) or the MA Program in Modern History of Georgia at Ilia State University (co-chaired by myself and Stephen Jones). But enthusiasm inevitably hits financial limits at some point.
Indeed, funding historical research is a long-term endeavor, but anything short-term is doomed to failure without the fundamental underpinnings of history. Nobody likes long-term planning in Georgia, so we often fail to secure continuity. But suppose nothing changes in the way that Georgia’s politicians, as well as its foreign benefactors, tackle transformation. In that case, Georgians will continue to be driven by their “heroic” past and – consequently – remain less considerate of their future and less responsible for their present.
The views and opinions expressed on Civil.ge opinions pages are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Civil.ge editorial staff.
