The Idea of Georgia’s Independence and Newspaper “Sakartvelo” (Georgia) in 1917-1918s

For the purpose of illustration of the above mentioned we shall try to dwell a little more amply on the newspaper “Sakartvelo”, which was founded on under the auspices of magazine “Klde”. First issue of the newspaper “Sakartvelo” was published in May 24, 1915 under the editorship of Sandro Shanshiashvili. The editorial staff was located in Tbilisi, Moscow Street No4. The newspaper had 4-6 pages. In the editorial letter of the first issue of the newspaper, the publishers were addressing the readers and reflecting on the fact that they had to issue the newspaper in quite complicated circumstances. “At that time Western Europe and Georgia were enveloped in the war. Things, that had seemed obvious and beliefs, that were considered as indisputable, were demolished fundamentally in the onslaught of war and roaring of cannons and gunfire. Former political and economic powers and along with them existing ideals and values were demolished, while the substitute for them has not yet established itself clearly. Such situation may undermine existence of large nations, and it is true even more so in regard to small nations, which do not have sufficient strength for fighting and defending themselves”, - was stated in the program part of the newspaper “Sakartvelo”. Most probably, the author of this address was the editor Sandro Shanshiashvili, as he usually was the author of the editorial columns.   

From January 1, 1916 the newspaper “Sakartvelo” became daily “political, economic and literary newspaper”. The touch of censorship is already evident on its pages and some empty spaces indicate to materials that have been restricted from publication. The newspaper still attempts not to deviate from its principles, and each article is permeated with the ideas of freedom and independence.

From 1917 daily political, economic and literary newspaper “Sakartvelo” is officially proclaiming, that the newspaper is of “National-democratic” direction. 

The newspaper had its own correspondents in major towns and villages, as well as Petrograd and Moscow. By that time the number of staff has increased. One can see names of many outstanding public figures under the publications in the newspaper. Among the editorial staff are Ambrosi Khelaia, A. Asatiani, A. Akhmeteli, V. Barnov, E. Gabashvili, R. Gabashvili, V. Gunia, S. Dadiani, I. Vartagava, G. Veshapeli,  E. Takaishvili, P. Ingorokva, D. Kasradze, bishop Kirion, bishop Leonide, N. Lortkipanidze, K. Makashvili, Dutu Megreli, S. Mghvimeli, N. Nikoladze, G. Robakidze, Tedo Sakhokia, T. Tabidze, G. Kikodze…

In 1917 “Sakartvelo” was still published under the editorship of Sandro Shanshiashvili, but after 90th issue Grigol Veshapeli became the editor of the newspaper, while starting from 1918 – Geronti Kikodze was the editor of the paper.

After the February Revolution in Russia, in the newspaper appeared a column “Georgians, be wise, united and sedate”.  In the letter, published under this column we see the same aspirations – freedom and unity of Georgia and a call upon the population for rescuing of the country.

“Sakartvelo” was welcoming the February Revolution of Russia and proclaiming the idea of independence of Georgia. The newspaper believed that free Russia would bring independence to Georgia. Spiridon Kedia writes on the pages of the newspaper: “In the end of February fell the regime, which has treated Georgia so villainously. The Dynasty, which has violated the agreement, concluded with Georgia and brought bloodshed to the country, was exiled. This is an outstanding act. Freedom of speech, of written word, meeting and conscience, this is what Revolution brings; universal suffrage, secret vote and etc, this is what Revolution proclaims. The hierarchy, strengthened and safeguarded through centuries, has been done away with. There will be no people, enjoying advantage and power from birth… Personal dignity, merits, manhood – these are new measures of importance and influence of a person…We are greeting this revolution with rapture. Many long years to the new regime of Russia. But…and that is where difference between Russian and us start to reveal…” (79).

It becomes clear, that prior to the February revolution, newspaper “Sakartvelo” was restraining itself from “revealing” party activities of National-democrats and the organization was acting illegally. It is true, that National-democratic party conducted constituent assembly later (11) and was officially registered, as a political organization, but the nucleus of national-democrats was formed within the ranks of social-federalists during the I World War. With their assistance and efforts the newspaper “Sakartvelo” was founded, which proclaimed in 1917 that it shared ideas of national-democratic movement. From the content of the newspaper becomes evident, that it had chosen this direction from the day of its founding. The newspaper was proclaiming the idea of freedom and serving democratic principles. From the words of Spiridon Kedia it becomes clear, that after the February revolution National-democrats started their official political activities and the newspaper ‘Sakartvelo” became their periodic organ.

It is interesting what does Spiridon Kedia imply, when he talks about differences between Russians and Georgians, namely when he says that “here is when differences between Russians and Georgians start to reveal. We should realize that such differences exist. For liberated Russia these civil norms are sufficient to take off, express all it veiled power and creativity. For Georgia this is not sufficient. Civil rights are characteristic to free nations. If the nation does not posses sits own government, if the law of the nation is not written by the offsprings of the nation, if governance of the nation is in the hands of an alien and not in the hands of its own kin, all civil rights are vane. The soul of the nation shall be confined, its existence restricted, the power of creativity weak and success is impossible . . . That is why to ensure, that it is uniformly beneficial, today’s revolution should first of all bring to Georgia national freedom. Revolution shall only then be complete, when in free Georgia Georgians shall themselves organize and dispose of its own democratic regime of governance. Georgia could not have started renovation through proclaiming of norms of civil rights, but should start from restoration of its national freedom. This should happen either now or never.” (79)

Newspaper “Sakartvelo” was the first influential periodic organ, which so clearly, comprehensively and validly posed the issue of independent statehood of Georgia and preference of democratic ideals and consequently, the appeal to proclaim independence of Georgia is permanently voiced in the newspaper.  

“Sakartvelo” is impelling the government of Georgia to proclaim independence, requires from the ruling social-democratic party to sever connections with the Bolsheviks and take up sound national footing: “bolshevism in Russia turned into the synonym of hooliganism, raids and rejection of anything sound. It has degenerated and the socialist idea gave rise to barbaric anarchy, which in combination with  weaknesses of Menshevism destroyed Russia. And at this very time our ruling party is begging this executioner to come and help us . . . This party is imposing on our nation Bolsheviks . . .they have neither means, nor ability to defend us even if they wanted, but they don’t . . .” (114) 

It is absolutely clear, that ‘Sakartvelo” was realizing the threat that bolshevism posed to our country, and was assessing events realistically. Although it should be stated, that the newspaper also comprehended clearly that safeguarding of the statehood could be possible only through relying on some strong power. It saw the way out in Europe. Member of staff of the paper Tite Margvelashvili states in his publication “Our orientation, that Georgia should orient itself on Germany, as “Germany publicly stated in Brest-Litovsk, that they shall acknowledge independence of Georgia. Conducting of truce negotiations in Trapzun is another confirmation of this. Consequently it is clear that our independence and statehood does not interfere with the plans of the states of the Middle Europe . . . It is of crucial importance for us to enter into economic cooperation with Germany and establishing of our political independence”. (115)

The author of the article considered, that orientation towards Russia and England would not bring political independence to Georgia, as France and Russia would not acknowledge independence of small country under the Russian rule, as their activities would be considered as interference into internal affairs of another state, which from economic standpoint meant further weakening of the nation. So, orientation towards Germany was the only option. As the author of the article stated, this would promote political independence of the country and improve its economic position, which is why the newspaper was encouraging proclaiming of independence of the country without further delay.

Free statehood is possible, desirable and beneficial for the nation only when it ensures peaceful development of the country, when equality and freedom of citizens is safeguarded, when the law and justice and not violence and discretion, rules the country; when economic development of the nation is promoted. Could Georgia alone build jural state? Member of staff of the paper A. Asatiani in his article “Patronage of Germany” states, that for the purpose of formation of strong and sound state different resources are necessary – intellectual, moral, property, political culture, discipline and etc. “We thought, that we possessed all the above referred in excess… which external force can we apply for assistance to build our national statehood and adorn our motherland? The country, which Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania and Finland have gone to obtain such help – is Germany…Today our national state is partitioned and disintegrated. The body of Georgia is torn into two parts and we don’t know what pieces shall be torn away from the body of the country yet . . . Through sibbing of German firmness and discipline to our national qualities and directing of economic waves, reaching us from the West towards the desirable direction we shall be able to lay the ground for strong Georgia and maybe our future generations shall witness another Golden Age in Georgia”. (116)

As it becomes evident Georgia was pinning its hopes on Germany and National-democrats, for those who represented right-wing opposition it was clear, that the starting point of building of Georgian statehood was strongly linked to Germany, while Social-democrats were developing plans for federal organization of Georgia, social-federalists and social-revolutionaries were developing plans for establishing of confederation, National-democratic fraction required separation of Georgia from the Transcaucasia and proclaiming of Georgia as independent state.

Day by day, the newspaper was calling on proclaiming of independence of Georgia more persistently and criticizes those who oppose the independence of Georgia. Restoration of independent statehood and inculcation of democratic values are viewed as synonyms. The newspaper places high emphasis on discussion on advantages of democratic regime, civil rights and freedoms, free choice, impartial judiciary, free economy. Outstanding Georgian writers, publicists and public figures participated in these debates.

Unexpectedly the army of Ottomans invades Borchalo province. Truce negotiations in Batumi are hampered. Acknowledgement of independence of the Republic of Transcaucasia by leading states was delayed due to different impediments that arose. Ottomans and Germany were in no hurry to promote speedy and successful resolution of negotiations. In such circumstances the newspaper ‘Sakartvelo” starts to voice its concern: “delays are impossible, those groups, which brought our country to this state are responsible to take into consideration real demands of life and direct all their efforts and salvage for our people and their future what is left to be salvaged”.

It is evident from the pages of newspaper ‘Sakartvelo”, that several days prior to adoption of the Independence Act, the government was going with the stream absolutely spontaneously. The newspaper puts the blame on the government for creation of such situation and thinks that current government has contributed more to this situation than the army of Ottomans and Bolsheviks revolt. The government had no power to protect itself and the country. “Dismantling and disintegration of internal forces, undermining of national integrity on one hand, and failure to take into consideration the external forces – this is what our internal and external policy is characterized by during the last year”. (124) 

“Sakartvelo” was the irreconcilable opponent of ruling political forces and requests all parties to refuse from pro-Russian policy, as “the Russian threads are bringing the Ottoman’s army to Georgia, but the Ottomans are persecuting Russian policy in the Caucasus in the same manner, as they are fighting the Russian army”.

The critique becomes more and more fierce before May 26. It is obvious, that the team of people, united around ‘Sakartvelo” were assessing established political situation correctly and were setting preconditions for proclaiming of independence of Georgia in May 26.

May 26 and ‘Sakartvelo”

In May 26, 1918 Georgia announced its independence. The newspaper exclusively published the poem of George Leonidze, dedicated to this day. This poem was unpublished before, as communist censorship had suppressed its publication. This poem of George Leonidze was published in the newspaper immediately, when the editorial staff saw it.

In May 27 ‘Sakartvelo” publishes the text of the Act and rapturously welcomes it.  In the editorial column is published an article under the title “Independent Georgia restored, hale to Georgia!”. The article stated the following: “From date independence of the Georgian state is restored. Hale to Georgia and Georgian nation! All parts of Georgia, all layers of Georgian society, all groups shall revere restored independence of Georgia. . . Georgian people, be it a farmer, worker, craftsman, trader or producer, should all unite themselves for the purpose of building of Georgian state. . .” (125)

In the opinion of the newspaper, the government of independent Georgia should immediately embark on the road of establishing of peaceful relations with the Ottomans and their allies, as well as all neighbor nations. The newspaper does not lose hope, that Germany shall be political patron of Georgia and shall assist it in regulation of economic and financial problems that Georgian army shall be strengthened and shall with dignity follow traditions of its celebrated ancestors, shall stand on the guard of Georgian territory, its freedom and national government.

The article ends up with a call upon nation:

“Sons of Georgia, the freedom of Georgia was conceived in the internal and external wars and raging storms, enveloping the world. Let’s unite ourselves around Georgia to protect and promote its prosperity! Hale to liberated Georgia! Hale to Georgian nation!”

Along with rapture, independence of Georgia, proclaimed in May 26 has brought along numerous concerns. This fact is considered on the pages of the newspaper as paying tribute to the Georgian banner, confirmation of the ideas and directions, that public figures and writers of ‘Sakartvelo” were reiterating on daily basis. Declaration of independence of Georgia was precondition for transfer of Georgia to democratic regime. With adoption of the Declaration Georgia has joined the western world and acknowledged democratic values. Georgian state has announced permanent neutrality in the sphere of international politics. In those times military-political alliances, to which Georgia would have aspired to accede, were not yet formed. The only political aspiration that appeared in Georgian establishment of that time was to join the League of Nations, though this aspiration remained a dream and the League of Nations itself did not last long.

The newspaper considers that the major objective of the elected Parliament was elaboration of the Constitution and implementation of social reforms. ‘The life has exhausted the revolutionary path now the floor goes to the parliamentary legislation and evolutionary creativity”. (126)

From that day, the newspaper “Sakartvelo” had also exhausted the revolutionary path, as it has attained what it was fighting for with written word for years. It is clear, that the road that it had passed was not easy. Behind each word, weighted hundred times was huge risk and courage.

After May 26, 1918 ‘Sakartvelo” focuses on issues related to building of the statehood and discussions around the need of elaboration of the supreme law of the country – the Constitution. What Georgian Constitution should be like? The newspaper has initiated this discussion even prior to proclamation of independence and it has dedicated numerous interesting analytical articles after declaration of independence too.

Articles of Georgian journalists and writers, who have contributed to introduction of democratic principles, freedom of press and freedom of expression, published on the pages of “Sakartvelo” are extremely interesting. In the newspaper publications, one more important principle is clearly evident. Movement towards the north does not ensure progress and the authors are oriented towards the West. At the same time integration with Europe along with political changes requires huge internal transformation. Is Georgia and each of its citizen ready to dispose of its fate independently and undertake upon himself his share of responsibility? They were not only opponents of the regime of that period, but were representing the positive force, which was trying to form new and attractive alternatives in the form of democracy and free relations and were initiators of cooperation with European structures.

In 1917-1918 Grigol Robakidze was actively collaborating with “Sakartvelo” and was supporter of National-democratic movement. On the pages of the newspaper he starts passionate propagation of “Europeanized” culture and world.  

Grigol Robakidze does not doubt that Georgia shall be liberated, united and integral. Despite the fact that Georgian are of a rather impulsive character than following sense, he still believes that true and deep feelings shall give rise to different creativity in Georgia. Promotion of formation of “truly Georgian style” is the chief credo of creative work of Grigol Robakidze. Retaining of all that reveals and strengthens identity for which the country is interesting for the outer world. At the same time development of new relations, new way of thinking and acknowledgement of values, that shall unite Georgia with large European family. Political transformation, which shall be extremely difficult but necessary, if we want the state to survive.

Georgia-Europe-Asia – this is a triangle of Robakidze and the crossroad of cultures (36). Russia, which is enveloped by the anarchy of instincts, which has no strength of ideas, beliefs, ideals or moral. This bitter reality is closing in on the south, from the north.

The theme of Russia is quite widely covered in the letters of Grigol Robakidze. The author dwells upon all issues, starting from the revolt of Bolsheviks, and ending with the party of social-revolutionaries, which can be related to Georgian reality. “Sakartvelo” covers the issues related to the frame of mind of Russia and political decisions. That is why Grigol Robakidze along with other Georgian writers depicts the Russia of Dostoevsky and Andrei Bjel on one hand, and the Russia in the hands of anarchists on the other hand. These two Russias have always been in conflict with each other and yet supplementing each other.

‘Russian by his nature is a Bolshevik. This maximalism is manifestation of the soul, but yet Russian nation is strong and gifted. And yet the culture is not only expression of the soul: “It is creativity of objects and social characteristics . . . Russian man resembles the man, who rejected automobile only because he was not offered an airplane and now is dragging on the road in a cart. I assume this example correctly depicts weaknesses of Russia in building its statehood. Russia today is anarchic and by chaotic flapping of wings is flying around the verge of a brink. It is really doubtful whether Russia shall come as a winner out of these hardships.” (91)

Grigol Robakidze identifies three factors, characterizing Russia of that time: the cadet (bourgeois- democratic), Bolshevik (socialist) and Menshevik. He considers that of all the above listed the strongest element is the Bolsheviks and he admonishes Georgian society: ‘Let’s not be following the fantasies that sprung in the fog of Petrograd. We have our own road to follow and let’s try to collect all our forces not to undermine the idea of national freedom, conceived through revolution and demolish it by anarchy. “ (92)

For Grigol Robakidze socialist ideas have false grounds. He considers national-democratic party as the force, representing national interests best. Western culture is attracting him, because the persons ‘ego” is more clearly cut there. In western mentality individualistic approach is prevailing. Individual freedom is the goal of social ideal. In the opinion of Grigol Robakidze ruling of state on the platform of psychology of socialism is unacceptable.

Grigol Robakidze dedicated numerous interesting articles to outstanding public figures, writers and historic heroes on the pages of newspaper ‘Sakartvelo”. His extremely interesting essay “Tamar” was published in “Sakartvelo” several days before proclaiming of independence of Georgia.

Queen Tamar, Besiki, Aleksandre Chavchavadze, Giorgi Sharvashidze, Archil Jorjadze, Tician Tabidze, Niko Pirosmani and others are main heroes of creative work of Grigol Robakidze of that period. Writing about them was serving the main objective – national idea, idea of independence, as the main essence of individualism and foundation of the state.

The period of collaboration with “Sakartvelo” is the period of shedding of new light on the disposition and attitude of Grigol Robakidze. Individual freedom, overcoming the heavy burden of stereotypes, introducing of criticism, pluralism of ideas and thoughts, analysis of the past not for the sake of being attached to it, but for the purpose of its revisiting and rethinking. Complete reformation and changes. Such is Grigol Robakidze on the pages of the newspaper “Sakartvelo”. His ideas and creative work was also contributing to maturing of the idea of independence in the consciousness of the public. 

In that period Tician Tabidze was actively collaborating with newspaper “Sakartvelo”. His poems, literary essays and publicistic works were published in newspaper “Sakartvelo”. Tician was sending his essays and articles specially for “Sakartvelo” even from Moscow. It is while he was in Moscow, that he wrote a very interesting article about the February revolution of Russia, where he talks about monotonousness and amazing ability of misrepresentation of historic facts of Russia. In Tician’s publicistic essays is reflected the search for new and more liberal Russia.

Tician thinks, that Russia is a puzzle for even Russians themselves, that they are expecting a catastrophe to happen in Russia in the same way as you expect that after each night there is a day to come. Fragility of the February revolution is gradually giving birth to the apparition of the October revolution of Bolsheviks. Russia had to stand the test, and the Georgian poet was anxious to the depths of his soul, as the processes initiated in Moscow were impacting Georgia. He was observing the birth of Russia with huge interest and was reminiscensing about the days of French commune.

Tician recall revolutions of France in his letters on numerous occasions, even when he addresses the Georgian writers with his open letter (84) and calls upon them to follow the example of French poets, writers and artists. Over three hundred gifted French writers and artists have sacrificed their lives to revolution and in France they have gotten used to the idea, that for 50 years they would face industrial crisis. Tician calls upon Georgian writers towards fight and protest (64). Tician’s call is quite revolutionary. Freedom - this is the goal, towards which all Georgian writers should aspire. “Today’s cruel war has revealed, that there is no other word more sacred and dear, than the word “motherland” . . .Georgians, who were born and brought up in slavery today have opportunity to repeat the preface, that the chronicler starts ‘The Life of Kartli” and which has been proved true by Georgians throughout the long history of the nation”.

- We shall serve as slave no one except for the God who created us . . .

“Free and happy Georgia shall unite us” (85)

In his publicistic assay “The Central Asia” Tician dwells upon the choice of Georgia. He started thinking in this direction after the First National Assembly and he started reminiscencing about the national meeting of the Lazs, which was described by the Byzantine writer Agathiss. The King Aiet was supporting orientation towards Persia, but an old man Fartats requested the floor and was substantiating, as to why he would support orientation towards old allies – Byzanty, as they were culturally more developed, than Persians and had the same religion. “In this historical etching the power of words and the orators are amazing . . . in this etching you see the history of Georgian nation, permanent search for new orientation, as there was no hope for surviving independently. The last king of Georgia and his chancellor Solomon Leonidze were facing this challenge too.” (96)

At the First National Assembly of Georgia, Noe Jordania brought up this issue too. Tician restrains himself from posing the issue from political angle and is trying to find the way out from general cultural perspective, which anyway brings him to political decisions. For Tician Tabidze, the main knot is in confrontation between the West and the East. “These maniacs of revolution are quite contemporary barbarians and the biggest hallucinatory of our days is Lenin, who in his revolutionary paroxysm is quite close to Russian Khlysts. . .In Russia the fate of independence of Russia and Europe has been already solved. That “small window”, that Russia has cut into Europe did not allow for a lot of sunrays to penetrate even when it was wide open. While we were always fed on that surrogate that we imported from Russia”.

Tician clearly sees the threat that Russian processes carry. Even in Moscow and Russia they did not favor those, who were considered as the founders of new direction. Freedom is a strange fruit for them too, and an additional burden. Russia cannot be an equal partner for Georgia and that is why Georgia should find its own way to independence.

Tician Tabidze was a publicist-fighter and poet-symbolist. He was extremely legible in the assessment of the processes and his articles are characterized by indepth analysis. Overcoming of national problem and the need for revision of literary life – this is end in itself for Tician. Documentary assays, literary-publicistic letters and social-political assays of Tician Tabidze are pierced with ideas of freedom and individuality. “The blue antlers” have entered the Georgian literature in ambitious manner and brought to it their values and individual pathos. Tician’s creativity and press publications are ambitious too. The majority of his political forecasts have come true.

Another outstanding author of “Sakartvelo” was Shalva Amirejibi. He was a patriot, publicist, poet and an outstanding public figure.  He took part in the plot of 1924, due to which he had to leave his motherland and immigrate, where he stayed till his death. Shalva Amirejibi was observing the processes in Russia with suspicion from the very beginning and was assuming, that whatever Russia plans in regard to the Caucasus “may drag Russian population of the Caucasus into a shady enterprise”. (109)

Shalva Amirejibi welcomed the autocephaly of the Georgian church, although he had his own opinion in regard to Georgian clergy.

Shalva Amirejibi considered that the liberation of the Georgian Church from the clerical dictate of Russia was a major event. He writes, that Georgian culture, architecture, painting, icons “as an example of the supreme form of art, as well as any aspect, that Georgian creativity has reflected” has been liberated from Russian dictate. The writer poses the question, as to what would have happened to Michelangelo’s, Da Vinci’s, Rafael’s imperishable masterpieces and whole Italian Renaissance, “which had found shelter with the church, if this Church had been taken hostage by somebody?!”

Shalva Amirejibi considers that free Georgia should be the arena of activities for free people. An independent country should be served by strong, energetic and knowledgeable people. The more that there are strong personalities, the stronger the state is. He is a supporter of individualism and thus, promotes European model of transformation. The state should rest on strong personalities. He sees as such Valerian Gunia, to whom he dedicated a very interesting publicistic essay. Shalva Amirejibi’s versatile pen, the gift of a writer and a publicist makes results of his collaboration with newspaper extremely interesting. In Gunia’s work and efforts he sees the victory of freedom, while he views freedom as the source of inspiration, which makes you attain the impossible:

‘The old Russia has died!

The old Georgia has died!

Only freedom is alive!

And I am haling the freedom!” (87)

Shalva Amirejibi was respecting individual gift and strong personalities, active people, the talent of which made them act in their everyday life and was feeding their souls. Such people view their individual talent not as a museum or an immovable exhibit, but apply their talent to daily life and are the leaders of the society. Only such people shall lead Georgia to independence and freedom.

Shalva Amirejibi was calling upon such creativity not only to Georgian writers and artists, but the government too. Ten days before proclaimation of independence he wrote an extremely interesting article under the title ‘The Constitution” (86), where he forecasted the future processes much earlier, than outstanding Georgian politicians. Shalva Amirejibi is disappointed; the National Council of Georgia discusses the issue of the basis of the constitution under compulsion and with lack of enthusiasm, and “they are not seized by courageous ideas, prompted by the desire of elaboration of the Magna Carta”. He has been waiting for elaboration of the Carta Magna by the government for a long while. He is not very surprised, as independence of Georgia was proclaimed by those people who did not aspire for national freedom, consequently, May 26 was not the outcome of their struggle and victory, but a compulsory step. While for Georgian artists and writers May 26 was the source of inspiration. The ruling party did not even fully realize the importance of the event.

Shalva Amirejibi is extremely concerned by those unprepared and unforeseen processes, which social-democrats imposed on Georgia. The voice of authors of “Sakartvelo” was not sufficient for awakening of Georgian Mensheviks. Social-democrats by their mental and spiritual state did not agree with declaration of independence of Georgia and that is why they seemed to be talking different languages. 

Thus, newspaper ‘Sakartvelo” represented a tribune, on the pages of which the idea of the independence of Georgia was ripening. This idea was one which allowed Georgian society to dream of freedom and bring political forces to acknowledgement of political freedom. Their supraliminal aspiration towards freedom was crowned by the Declaration of May 26.

Rusudan Vashakidze

Ph.D in Journalism