CC BY
0IRSTI 03.61.91 UDC 394
DOI:10.56032/2523-4684.2023.3.7.65
A. Kadaria1, N. Vakhania2 12Sokhumi State University (Tbilisi, Georgia)
NATIONALITY, ETHNICITY, THE TRIBALISM OF THE NATION...
Annotation
This paper will study the aspects of Ilia Chavchavadze's journalism. Ilia Chavchavadze often published articles on the political and economic situation of different countries on the pages of "Iveria". This, of course, had its purpose. Ilia, first of all, wanted the Georgian readers to be sure about how the life of the society or this or that nation was developing abroad, and the second and most important goal was to open the eyes of the same society and show what the conquered countries were doing to correct their political and social situation. With taxation, we can argue that he was only concerned with the struggle of other nations for independence to start his own. It was not easy. Chavchavadze, apart from the king of Russia, had many enemies inside as well, because no one wanted to give up the primacy. At the end of the article, we will review Mrs. Nora Drehurst's work in Georgia and her attitude toward Ilia.
Key words: Journalism; the struggle for independence; Landowners, Examples of other countries; Ilia's merits
А. Кадария1, Н. Вахания2 12Сухум мемлекетт1куниверситетi (Тбилиси, Грузия)
¥ЛТЫ, ЭТНИКАЛЫК КАТЫСТЫЛЫРЫ, ¥ЛТЫК ТРАЙБАЛИЗМ...
Аннотация
Бул макалада Илья Чавчавадзенiн журналистика аспектiлерi карастырылады. Илья Чавчавадзе "Иверия" беттерiнде эртYрлi елдердеп саяси жэне экономикалык жаFдай туралы макалаларды жиi жариялады. Бул, эрине, эз максаты болды. Илья, ен алдымен, грузин окырмандарынын шетелде KOFамнын немесе белгiлi бiр улттын эмiрi калай дамып жатканына сенiмдi болуын калады, ал екiншi жэне ен манызды максат сол коFамнын кэзiн ашып, жаулап алынFан елдердiн саяси жэне элеуметт'1к жаFдайын тYзету Yшiн не iстеп жатканын кэрсету болды. Салык салуFа келе^н болсак, бiз оны баска
65
улттардын тэуелсзд'1к Yшiн KYpeciMeH айналысып, тек эзiмiздi бастау Yшiн айналыскан деп айта аламыз. Бул онай болFан жок. Чавчавадзеде Ресей королiнен баска кэптеген Жаулар болды, эйткенi ешкiм бiрiншiлiктен бас тарткысы келмедi. Макаланын сонында 6í3 Нора Дрехерстханымнын ГрузиядаFы жумысын жэне онын ИльяFа деген кэзкарасын карастырамыз.
ТYЙ¡нд¡ сездер: журналистика; тэуелсiздiк Yшiн ^рес; жер иелерi, баска елдердiн мысалдары; Ильянын енбеп
А. Кадария1, Н. Вахания2 12 Сухумский государственный университет (Тбилиси, Грузия)
НАЦИОНАЛЬНОСТЬ, ЭТНИЧЕСКАЯ ПРИНАДЛЕЖНОСТЬ, ТРАЙБАЛИЗМ НАЦИИ...
Аннотация
В этой статье будут рассмотрены аспекты журналистики Ильи Чавчавадзе. Илья Чавчавадзе часто публиковал на страницах "Иверии" статьи о политической и экономической ситуации в разных странах. В этом, конечно, была своя цель. Илья, прежде всего, хотел, чтобы грузинские читатели были уверены в том, как развивается жизнь общества или той или иной нации за рубежом, а вторая и самая важная цель состояла в том, чтобы открыть глаза тому же обществу и показать, что делают завоеванные страны для исправления своего политического и социального положения. Что касается налогообложения, то мы можем утверждать, что он был озабочен борьбой других наций за независимость только для того, чтобы начать свою собственную. Это было нелегко. У Чавчавадзе, помимо короля России, было много врагов и внутри страны, потому что никто не хотел отказываться от первенства. В конце статьи мы рассмотрим работу миссис Норы Дрехерст в Грузии и ее отношение к Илье.
Ключевые слова: журналистика; борьба за независимость; Землевладельцы, примеры других стран; заслуги Ильи
Introduction. Georgians have had much trouble, and it is probably a worn-out phrase, but it is an unmistakable truth that they were lucky enough to have children who could carry the heavy yoke of the country with their strong shoulders...
Many praiseworthy names have shone in our history, the lives and work of many people have brought tears to
our eyes, countless hearts have been touched, the strings of our souls have been tugged, and countless people are proud of us. However, in my deep belief, three names stand out on the vault of the sky of Georgian public figures: Grigol Khandzteli, Sulkhan-Saba Orbeliani, and Ilia Chavchavadze. I am referring to public figures, otherwise, among the crowned ones, of course, no one can compete with David, Tamar, and Giorgi the Magnificent (again I name the three because our Lord also represents one being-trinity).
The subject of my study is the aspects of the journalistic work of Ilia the Great. Ilia Chavchavadze often published articles on different countries' political and economic situations on the pages of "Iveria". This, of course, had its purpose. Ilia, first of all, wanted the Georgian readers to have true information about how the life of the society or this or that nation was developing abroad, and the second and most important aim was to open the eyes of the same society and show what the conquered countries were doing to improve their political and social position. For this purpose, the writer referred to such states as Ireland and England, Scotland and England, Poland, Greece, Germany, America, and others. Not even a single minor process in Europe or the Middle and Far East escaped Chavachavadze's sharp gaze, he studied everything carefully and then shared it with his readers. What did Ilia the Great need this for? What benefit did he expect from this? To one and only one: to say to his native nation: If others can, why can't we take care of our own country? Why can't we fly the national flag of freedom? That's why we can prove that if his pen was writing about another nation's struggle for freedom, it was only because he wanted to start his own. It was not easy. Chavchavadze, apart from the king of Russia, also had many enemies inside, because no one wanted to give him the first place (although he did not ask for it at all).
Let's listen to Niko Nikoladze: "You said that we all thought that we were like Ilia. Why should I lie: I am among them. Nobody wanted to be worth less than him, and we all tried to replace him ...
Now?
What now?
If we could fill this void, let's fill it. Ilia is not here anymore... that place is empty, however, even if we all join together, it will still be empty" [1, p.974].
But Ilia could not become a great Ilia if he was afraid of envy and enmity...
Methods. There are methods of selective and problematic analysis of Ilia Chavchavadze's literary creation in the article.
Literature Review. For this purpose, I selected the articles published by Ilia Chavchavadze on the pages of "Iveria" newspaper in 1877-1898. The article that we present for discussion in this letter is "Ireland and England - a historical and economic essay" [2, p.9-46].
Main Discussion. The very first words of this journalistic letter grab the reader's attention. Here is what Ilia Chavchavadze writes:
"The second half of the nineteenth century brought two great things to the fore. Both of them agree that the political and economic structure of Europe is being shaken from the old foundations and it is necessary to replace the old with a new one. The causes of these two are ancient, they have been active for a long time and have put their stamp on the progress of Europe, but this second half of our century was not enough. He has done two things today to such an extent, he stood up to such an extent that he asks for a word for what has been resolved, for what has been decided, and not for meddling, not for lying, just for mixing, to grind the heart, as it was before" [2, p.9-10].
Ilia explains that the world should thank the policies of Napoleon III because it was at this time that nationalism came forward. This movement united and united the gathered of one country into one fist. For example, this happened in Italy and Germany. The people of one tribe gathered together and also in their place. Of course, it was easier for the countries listed above, because there were few people of other tribes in their nations, and if there were, they were so insignificant that they did not interfere with the political unification of the
country. It was different in Austria, where Germans, Hungarians, and Slavs also lived in large numbers. Here it was necessary to find such a way, which would not allow any representative of one nation to dominate the other, nor allow one to oppress the other. Austria was able to do this because it knew that it would win only by helping and uniting each other, sharing each other's pains and sorrows.
Here we must remember Ilia's speech at the annual meeting of the Tbilisi Georgian Local Bank on May 20, 1895, when the great patriot was outraged by the phrase thrown by one of the speakers at the meeting held the previous day (which Chavchavadze was unable to attend): "He has come from western part and has nothing to do with us." "They told that to the Georgian, how? Is there any Georgian here, in our congregation, in our land - he is a foreigner, not a family man, not blood and flesh of the big family called Georgia?!" - asks Ilia and gives the answer himself: "No, gentlemen! For any part of Georgia, be it From Guria, Samegrelo, Imereti, Kakheti, or Kartli, the door of our united family is open to take a brotherly part in our common plague and fest" [3, p.261-262].
It is clear what motivates Ilia Chavchavadze: he wants to make Georgians feel like they are children of a united country and awaken national feelings. It is for this purpose that the great Georgian describes in detail the process of national or "national", as he calls it, the awakening of feelings, consolidation, and fusion of nations in Europe. To this end, he tells the reader that, if the German was first in Germany, and this was not surprising, it was different in Austria. Several nations lived here side by side. The "Germans", who were numerically more, had the upper hand here as well, the Prussians looked at it with envy. It was difficult for "Hungary" to lose its primacy because politically it was more mature than others. The Slavs also woke up and tried to protect their identity so as not to be oppressed. Solving these issues and deepening the consciousness of the awakened nationalism created great difficulties, but "Bismarck's strong hand pushed Austria out of Germany" [2, p.12]. Instead, the clever Austrian rulers took advantage
of the situation and gave the Hungarians such rights that they could freely rely on it. The Slavs did not retreat either. They also remembered their great ancestors and history and on this ground, they confronted "Germans" and "Hungarians". The latter were given full rights to have their self-government and representation in the state. The author convincingly persuades the readers that this did not weaken Austria, on the contrary, it strengthened it and showed everyone that, it turns out, different nations can be equal in one state. "Perhaps the time is not far when Austria-Hungary, now bi-racial, will turn into tri-racial and become a state of Austro-Hungarian-Slavs", Ilia suggests [2, p.11].
It is impossible not to see here the hidden wish of the greatest patriot, that after decades the nation covered his forehead pierced by a bullet (by the nation again) with the halo of a saint: hopefully, Georgia will wake up someday and make a suitable request to Russia. We know very well that he, as a deputy of the first Duma of Russia, wanted to demand autonomous rights for Georgia. That's why in the above-mentioned article, Ilia did not limit himself to a general review and extensively introduced to Georgian society the awakening of the national idea among different peoples, especially in Ireland. This, in his opinion, was necessary for such attitudes to gradually take hold in Georgian society.
Speaking about Ireland, Ilia Chavchavadze relies on the work of Gladstone and notes that Austria has already proven that different nations can live under one state's roof if all nations are given an equal opportunity to develop.
Laws cannot be created in such a way that one nation develops and the other is disturbed - this is Ilia's firm opinion. That's why he admires Gladstone's personality and says that if the parliamentarian was able to win in this case - "Amazed Europe and history-loving England will represent one of the great things that humanity has never done before" [2, p.9-11].
I consider it necessary to repeat Chavchavadze's words of admiration in Gladstone's address, and I embellished it with the same sentence: aged, but "young
in heart and courage", Ilia always spent his time thinking about his country and concerned about it. We are surprised by his foresight and deep understanding, ability to see things correctly, and draw personal conclusions. Let's look at how he examines the economic structure of England from the bottom up and says that Ireland "represents a great burden to the English state" [2, p.10]. The great writer studies this topic in detail and informs the reader that this issue, firstly, will show us the current state of England and, secondly, nothing human should be alienated from us. This is, as it were, a kind of hint to Georgians: let's observe, delve deeper and maybe we can find something to emulate in the life of other nations, in their indomitable struggle or restless spirit, in their restless thinking about the development of the homeland and its people.
Indeed, Ilia Chavchavadze deeply studied the issue of land ownership in England and started it from the time when "the Normans invaded England" [2, p.10]. Before that, it turned out, they followed two types of system: one was the free man who owned the land, and the other was the slave who served the landowner. When the Normans conquered England, the victors, of course, divided and distributed the lands. This changed the old form of land ownership in England. To prove this, Ilia cites a common patrimonial deed (Domesday book) issued by the Normans in 1086, from which it can be seen that land ownership in England at this time creates the following picture: "60. 215 Demesne estates were founded by the Koroll. From this, the church and clergy were given 28,115 estates by Koroll and the remaining 32,100 to the knights, on the condition that in return for this mercy, they would render service to Koroll and become military beggars. These masters were called lords" [2, p.12-13].
The association "from the traveler's letters" is born by itself: "In the early days... giving great gifts to loyal sons was also very common: they gave land and property" [4, p.18]. i.e. Georgian kings also had such a custom: they gifted loyal serfs with the land.
The reader then learns that the lords are gradually taking over most of the land in England. They pay tribute
and military obligations directly to the king. In addition, there are small landlords and farmers who, in turn, pay tribute to the big landlords and do not have any obligations to the king. This act put all the land in the hands of the English lords, and surprisingly, the number of large landowners today is almost the same as in the above-mentioned 1086 deed. If then their number was 32,100, now this number is 30,766.
In 1845, famous people - Robert Peel and Bright shook this order of land ownership. They supported Gladstone, who criticized the land-lease laws, saying that in no normal and healthy state should private persons be given unlimited power, and even these private persons should not have the right, according to their will, to enter into lease agreements:' "To lease a place-estate, it must obey some law and it must not be dependent either on the power of one or on the inadequacy of the other [2, p.19], - Ilia explains to his readers.
When reading these lines, a Georgian man cannot help but remember Ilia's "Traveler's Letters" and Lelt Gh unia's complaint: "Now? Where is the nation? We are in Russia. Now everyone is failed, and everything is canceled. Gergeti village is at the foot of the Trinity. The king asked the local man to guard the throne, in exchange for that the king would give the entire village the freedom from serfdom. but in Russia, the kingship is lost, Russia does not listen to the Gujar king" [4, p.18].
Of course, what Chavchavadze indicated in his journalistic writings, he sometimes added flesh to his artistic works and in this way developed his thoughts and the minds of his readers. After listening to Lelth Ghunia's speech, we cannot help but repeat Gladstone's words that the law cannot act in favor of one and to the detriment of another, better to say: it "must not depend on either the power of one or the injustice of the other."
Let's go back to Ilia's reasoning about Ireland-England.
What was the state of land ownership in Ireland? Chavchavadze has studied this issue deeply. He cites figures that clearly show the plight of farmers in this country. Here too, as in England, the land was taken into
the hands of the aristocracy, and only five thousand four hundred men owned three-quarters of the estates. On top of that, there is an inexplicable fact even for scientists: Ireland's population, despite economic hardship, increased from 1,871,725 to 5,216,331 between 1766 and 1801. This has increased the price of land and taxes. So, for example, it turns out that up to two Tumanis of land were given for two days' worth of land. Moreover, unlike in England and Scotland, where a landless peasant could start working in many factories, the Irish farmer could not do this, because the industry was not developed here, and therefore there were no factoriesThe poverty of the peasants was greatly aggravated by the fantastic lack of harvest. In this area, people used to support themselves with potatoes, but in 1847, some kind of hay fever appeared, which destroyed the potato crop. This senescence did not disappear in one year and caused a lot of damage to Ireland so it still hasn't digested its consequences, explains Ilia Chavchavadze. Then he goes on to say that for this reason, a large part of the population of Ireland has been sent to foreign countries to save themselves, and has gone to France or Germany. Especially many went to America and helped their families and relatives from there.
After drawing such a picture, the purpose of the writer's journalistic letter "Nation and History" becomes clear, in which he shouts that if we do not acquire knowledge and master modern technologies, then the nation will be doomed to destruction and we will be razed "from the ground". The writer saw proof of this in the unfortunate example of the Irish peasantry. Then Ilia tells us about the perseverance of the Irish people and emphasizes that, despite the numerous misfortunes the Irish faced, they never stopped fighting for their sovereignty. Wherever they went, they always remembered their identity, their country, and their ill-fated and miserable peopleThis is indicated by the fact that in 1791, during the days of the French Revolution, they compiled the so-called "Union of United Irishmen", which fought for Ireland and which demanded from England to equalize Catholics and Protestants. At first,
the British pretended to give up a little, but then they turned around and canceled everything by force. Ireland appealed to France for help, it also sent 25 thousand people, but it was still not enough for big changes.
In 1798, Ireland rebelled again, but England made it worse and was soon fully annexed. It was at this time that a 25-year-old lawyer, Daniel O'Connell, appeared, and founded the society "Union of Catholics" [2, p.37]. This society soon made a big name, and in 1830, as soon as Daniel became a member of the English Parliament, he demanded the separation of Ireland. It is not surprising that this proposal was rejected by the Parliament with 532 votes against 38. In 1843, this man held 68 large and small rallies and tried to restore the Irish Parliament by October 8, but England sent an army and thwarted the patrimonial movement. "Such lack of presence forced the Irish to form a community outside of Ireland, whose members are called "Fennies" [2, p.37]. This society gives England a lot of trouble and thought, - adds Ilia Chavchavadze.
Here we should remember Ilia Chavchavadze's letter to Bishop Alexander, in which he seems to complain to him: "The poverty of the country is not only impoverishment and lack of wealth, as many people think, but rather when it does not have a virtuous, well-behaved, high-morale man, the fortress of the country..." [5, p.24]. So, we can say that Chavchavadze was very worried about the situation in his own country and was sad when he could not see the Irish-like attitude in Georgians or people like Daniel O'Connell. But today we can confidently say that Georgia had such a person and his name was Ilia Chavchavadze.
The second country that Ilia discusses in this article is Scotland. He informs the public that the land ownership is even worse here. In a country with more than 20 million acres of land and more than 3 million inhabitants, only 7,273 households own land.
How did this happen? - Ilia reads and explains to Georgian readers that there were the same reasons as in Ireland. However, there was an even greater scarcity of land, as Scotland was largely cattle-breeding, and this
encouraged the lords to seize larger territories. Moreover, the kings of England gave them more preference in this matter, because they wanted to be grateful to them. "This case was crowned with such a victory in the past century that the nobles took all the estates in their hands, the peasants took a piece of land, and the peasantry was thrown out of the estates [2, p.20-21]. Ilia touched on the issue of land ownership in Georgia in the article "Life and Law" [2, p.57], in which he notes that no rank in our country has been able to own land in such a unified way, and the peasant also owns the land, like a prince or a peasant, However, Russia has intervened here and changed the situation completely. That's why Ilia surprisingly asks in the above-mentioned article: "Shouldn't it be desirable for everyone to unite all public forces?... That's why they greatly sinned against the country and the people..." [2, p.21].
Here are the reasons that forced Ilia Chavchavadze to discuss the "famous Gladstone law", which is called the "Irish Land-bill" in England, the author informs us and explains its meaning to Georgian readers. It turns out that this law came from a custom of the Scots. It starts in a small village in Scotland - Ulster - and got its name from there. The farmer, of course, in agreement with the landlord, occupied the land, then cultivated it and verbally agreed on the price. He had the right to leave whenever he wanted, but the owner of the land had the same right: i.e. He could fire the farmer whenever he wanted, but he paid the latter the price of what the farmer had worked on his land. The farmer received this price not from the landlord, but from the person hired instead.
The origin of Gladstone's law is also based on this custom, but, of course, he made great changes in it and, on his initiative, the Parliament approved several laws. Here are the changes reflected here:
1. The first was that both the landlord and the farmer had to obey the rules introduced by the law. This was regulated by a conciliation judge and a new, special court
2. The term of ownership of the land by the farmer was determined - 31 years.
3. The landlord was prohibited from arbitrarily increasing the rent price;
4. The landlord was forbidden to fire the farmer without a court decision; If necessary, he was also ordered to pay compensation.
4. The farmer was given the right to purchase the estate if the landlord agreed to it and the state gave the farmer a preferential and long-term loan in this case.
"Such a law, cautiously, but a very important subject, is being sued - not only for England but also for the whole of Western Europe", - concludes Ilia at the end [2, p.44-45].
Now let's find out why Ilia Chavchavadze introduced the relationship between Ireland and England (as well as Scotland) to Georgian readers.
Already in 1880, Chavchavadze talks about the agrarian arrangement of ancient Georgia in the article "On the economic arrangement of ancient Georgia" [6, p.9] and notes that our nation has lived for thousands of years, survived countless wars, but has lasted to this day. Ilia wonders how economically this small country could bear such a life. He observes our economic system and concludes that, unlike other countries, in our country, this case was settled fairly, because the landless peasant was a rarity in Georgia. Then, after seeing what he saw, Ilia says that the vein of this rule was that the Georgian man pursued agriculture, which provided him with constant food to feed the community and himself. This was facilitated by the fact that there were two trends in our economic system: "one agricultural and the other domestic" [6, p.11]. The first one meant that free lands, fields, and forests were used by the society, and the household - by the peasant family itself. Both were equal and none of them outweighed the other.
But after the arrival of Tsarist Russia, things changed. Here is what Ilya writes about it:,... the Russians did not pay attention to our economic arrangement on this better side; Privilege and domesticity gained ground, inequality in land ownership fell, not only among
households but also among villages... There are villages with four or five households, and they have five hundred or six hundred days' worth of rural estates, while next to them there is another village, They miss the land and do not know what to do because of the narrowness" [6, p.11-12].
Let's remember Lelt Ghunia, who complains to Ilia: "What is our life now?" Eating and drinking must be bought, the forest must be bought, the road must be bought, the law must be bought as well..." [4, p.19].
By showing the relationship between England and Ireland, Ilia Chavchavadze showed Georgian society that the thinkers of advanced countries see the injustice of their laws and try to correct the situation themselves. While farming in Georgia was regulated in this regard, the laws of other countries made big disorder. They brought nothing but loss and poverty to the Georgian peasant. The situation is worse in this part by 1905. This can be seen from Ilia's speech, which he delivered at a private meeting of the nobility.
"The country has many estates, which the government took away from our Georgian peasants, gave to people of other tribes, and settled them. There is no land for a Georgian peasant, but there is a lot for a German, a Frenchman, a Russian, and an Armenian. A short record of Ilia Chavchavadze's speech at a private meeting of the nobility on March 6, 1905, was printed in the newspaper "Iveria" in 1905, number 21 [7, p.264-266]. It was possible to publish this speech in 1905, but before that, under the supervision of a strict censor, it was only revealed to the public in a roundabout way. That's why it was so important to carefully read all the articles of the great patriot and read about Georgia's struggle in them. This is what the leading society of Ilia's time did, and they were trying to understand with all their hearts every point of the great nationalist.
Conclusion. I wanted to end the letter with these words, but, fortunately for me, with the help of a friend, I got hold of the Kutaisi literary magazine "Mtsvanekvavila", in which Mr. Henry Dolidze's article was printed on such an important issue for me [8, p.90-91].
This article tells about Ms. Nora Drehurst (real name Hannah Ann Robinson), who turned out to have provided two invaluable services to Georgia. The Irish lady spoke French, German, and Irish fluently, and painted brilliantly; He was introduced to Ilia Chavchavadze by Marjorie Wardrop. It was under the influence of the latter that Nora came to Georgia and fell in love with this area with all her heart. She traveled in our country, walked many corners, and loved it with her heart and soul. So, apart from his native Ireland, he actively supported Georgia in the national liberation battle. In 1906, became a member of the Committee for the Support of Georgia, using all the tribunes in favor of Georgians. She regularly published articles about "a geographically distant, but internally close, recalcitrant Caucasian state, which at that time could not even be found on the map." The following year, at an international conference in The Hague, she delivered a rather emotional and impressive speech in support of Georgia's independence... Then (executed in 1930) another great surprise was prepared for us Georgians: the unique photographic material collected during his trip to Georgia was exhibited in the library of Oxford University" [8, p.90-91].
So the great Ilia not only stirred up the hearts of his countrymen in Georgia with the love of the country but also gathered around him those foreigners who could speak for our country. After all, his dream, like Grigol Orbeliani, was to firmly establish Georgians "among other nations".
References:
1. Chkheidze R. Oak in the desert. - Tbilisi: Our writing, 2020. (In Georg.).
2. Chavchavadze I. Ireland and England - historical and economic essay, op. congregation in ten volumes. Volume IX. -Tbilisi: State Publishing House of Georgia, 1957. (In Georg.).
3. Chavchavadze I. Ilia Chavchavadze'sspeech at the annual meeting of the Georgian Regional Bank of Tbilisi on May 20, 1895. A complete collection of works in ten volumes. Vol. IX. - Tbilisi: State Publishing House of Georgia, 1957. (In Georg.).
4. Chavchavadze I. Passenger's letters (from Vladikavkaz to Tbilisi). Georgian writers at school op. II. - Tbilisi: Messenger of Georgia, 2007. (In Georg.).
5. Chavchavadze I. Letter to Bishop Alexander. - Tbilisi: Thoughts, 1989. (In Georg.).
6. Chavchavadze I. About the economic structure of ancient Georgia, six-volume. Volume IV. - Tbilisi: Palitra, 2012. (In Georg.).
7. Chavchavadze I. Life and Law. A complete collection of works in ten volumes. Vol. VI. - Tbilisi: State Publishing House of Georgia, 1957. (In Georg.).
8. Dolidze H. Irish writer fighting for the independence of Georgia. // Green flower. - 2020. - N.5. (In Georg.).
