The present chapter is devoted to the use of history – in particular, the methods of ethnogenesis – and other scientific disciplines as mobilizing tools in the conflict between the Georgian and Abkhazian communities. This chapter describes the kind of arguments and scientific disciplines to be found in the Georgian-Abkhazian conflict over the political status of Abkhazia, and the way in which scholars in both national communities have reflected on questions such as the moral responsibility of the intelligentsia in the mass mobilizations leading to the war, and criteria for truthfulness in scientific debates 유튜브 다중 다운로드.
Coppieters, B. (2002). In Defence of the Homeland: Intellectuals and the Georgian-Abkhazian Conflict. In B. Coppieters, & M. Huysseune (Eds.), Secession, History and the Social Sciences ms 오피스. (pp. 89-116). Brussels: VUBPRESS.
The hypothesis that the three indigenous Caucasian language stocks (Abkhaz-Adyghean, Nakh-Daghestanian, and Kartvelian) are genetically related has little support at the present day among linguists specializing in these languages 한글 파일 다운로드. Nonetheless, the so-called ‘Ibero-Caucasian’ hypothesis had strong institutional backing in Soviet Caucasology, especially in Georgia, and continues to be invoked in certain contemporary discourses of a political and identitarian nature 악인 전 다운로드. In this paper the history of the Ibero-Caucasian hypothesis will be presented against the background of research into the autochthonous languages of the North and South Caucasus, and also in connection with the historiographic debate over the relation of Abkhazia to Georgia
Tuite, K 오피스 365 proplus 다운로드. (2008). The rise and fall and revival of the Ibero-Caucasian hypothesis. Historiographia Linguistica, 35(1-2), 23-82.