List of GovernorsI.Administration of the Trustees.James Edward Oglethorpe81732-1743William Stephens91743-1751Henry Parker91751-1753Patrick Graham91753-1754II.Royal Administration.John Reynolds1754-1757Henry Ellis1757-1760Sir James Wright1760-1782III.Provincial Administration.William Ewen101775Archibald Bulloch111776Button Gwinnett111777Jonathan Bryan111777IV.Georgia as a State.John A. Treutlen121777-1778John Houston1778-1779John Wereat131779George Walton1779-1780Richard Hawley1780Stephen Heard131780-1781Myrick Davies131781Nathan Brownson1781-1782John Martin1782-1783Lyman Hall1783-1785Samuel Elbert1785-1786Edward Telfair1786-1787George Matthews1787-1788George Handley1788-1789George Walton1789-1790Democratic-RepublicanEdward Telfair1790-1793” ”George Matthews1793-1796” ”Jared Irwin1796-1798” ”James Jackson1798-1801” ”David Emanuel1801” ”Josiah Tattnall1801-1802” ”John Milledge1802-1806” ”Jared Irwin1806-1809” ”David B. Mitchell1809-1813” ”Peter Early1813-1815” ”David B. Mitchell1815-1817” ”William Rabun141817-1819” ”Matthew Talbot141819” ”John Clarke1819-1823” ”George M. Troup1823-1827” ”John Forsyth1827-1829” ”George R. Gilmer1829-1831National RepublicanWilson Lumpkin1831-1835Democratic-RepublicanWilliam Schley1835-1837UnionGeorge Gilmer1837-1839DemocratCharles J. McDonald1839-1843UnionGeorge W. Crawford1843-1847WhigGeorge W.B. Towns1847-1851DemocratHowell Cobb1851-1853Constitutional UnionHerschell V. Johnson1853-1856DemocratJoseph E. Brown1857-1865”James Johnson151865”Charles J. Jenkins1865-1868”Thomas H. Ruger1868”Rufus B. Bullock1868-1871RepublicanBenjamin Conley141871-1872”James M. Smith1872-1876DemocratAlfred H. Colquitt1876-1882”Alexander H. Stephens1882-1883”James S. Boynton141883”Henry D. McDaniel1883-1886”John B. Gordon1886-1890”W.J. Northen1890-1894”W.Y. Atkinson1894-1898”A.D. Candler1898-1902”Joseph M. Terrell1902-1907”Hoke Smith1907-1909”Joseph M. Brown1909-1911”Hoke Smith1911-”A brief bibliography, chiefly of historical materials, is given by U.B. Phillips in his monograph “Georgia and State Rights,” in vol. ii. of theAnnual Report of the American Historical Association for 1901(Washington, 1902). Valuable information concerning the resources and products of the state is given in the publications of the Department of Agriculture, which include weekly and monthlyBulletins, biennialReportsand a volume entitledGeorgia, Historical and Industrial(Atlanta, 1901). The Reports of the United States Census (especially the Twelfth Census for 1900 and the special census of manufactures for 1905) should be consulted, andMemoirs of Georgia(2 vols., Atlanta, Ga., 1895) contains chapters on industrial conditions.The principal sources for public administration are the annual reports of the state officers, philanthropic institutions, the prison commission and the railroad commission, and the revised Code of Georgia (Atlanta, 1896), adopted in 1895; see also L.F. Schmeckebier’s “Taxation in Georgia” (Johns Hopkins University Studies, vol. xviii.) and “Banking in Georgia” (Banker’s Magazine, vol. xlviii.). Education and social conditions are treated in C.E. Jones’sHistory of Education in Georgia(Washington, 1890), the Annual Reports of the School Commissioner, and various magazine articles, such as “Georgia Cracker in the Cotton Mill” (Century Magazine, vol. xix.) and “A Plea for Light” (South Atlantic Quarterly, vol. iii.). The view of slavery given in Frances A. Kemble’sJournal of a Residence on a Georgia Plantation in 1838-1839(New York, 1863) should be compared with R.Q. Mallard’sPlantation Life before Emancipation(Richmond, Va., 1897), and with F.L. Olmsted’sA Journey in the Seaboard Slave States(New York, 1856).The best book for the entire field of Georgia history is Lawton B. Evans’sA Student’s History of Georgia(New York, 1898), a textbook for schools. This should be supplemented by C.C. Jones’sAntiquities of the Southern Indians, particularly of the Georgia Tribes(New York, 1873), for the aborigines; W.B. Stevens’sHistory of Georgia to 1798(2 vols., Philadelphia, 1847-1859) and C.C. Jones, jun., History of Georgia (2 vols., Boston, 1883) for the Colonial and Revolutionary periods; C.H. Haskins’sThe Yazoo Land Companies(Washington, 1891); the excellent monograph (mentioned above) by U.B. Phillips for politics prior to 1860; Miss Annie H. Abel’s monograph “The History of Events Resulting in Indian Consolidation West of the Mississippi,” in vol. i. of theAnnual Report of the American Historical Association for 1906(Washington, 1908) for a good account of the removal of the Indians from Georgia; the judicious monograph by E.C. Woolley,Reconstruction in Georgia(New York, 1901); and I.W. Avery’sHistory of Georgia from 1850 to 1881(New York, 1881), which is marred by prejudice but contains material of value.The Confederate Records of the State of Georgiawere published at Atlanta in 1909. See also: E.J. Harden’sLife of George M. Troup(Savannah, 1840); R.M. Johnston and W.H. Browne,Life of Alexander H. Stephens (Philadelphia, 1878), and Louis Pendleton, Life of Alexander H. Stephens(Philadelphia, 1907); P.A. Stovall’sRobert Toombs(New York, 1892); H. Fielder’sLife, Times and Speeches of Joseph E. Brown(Springfield, Mass., 1883) and C.C. Jones, jun.,Biographical Sketches of Delegates from Georgia to the Continental Congress(New York, 1891). There is much valuable material, also, in the publications (beginning with 1840) of the Georgia Historical Society (see the list in vol. ii. of theReport of the American Historical Associationfor 1905).
List of Governors
A brief bibliography, chiefly of historical materials, is given by U.B. Phillips in his monograph “Georgia and State Rights,” in vol. ii. of theAnnual Report of the American Historical Association for 1901(Washington, 1902). Valuable information concerning the resources and products of the state is given in the publications of the Department of Agriculture, which include weekly and monthlyBulletins, biennialReportsand a volume entitledGeorgia, Historical and Industrial(Atlanta, 1901). The Reports of the United States Census (especially the Twelfth Census for 1900 and the special census of manufactures for 1905) should be consulted, andMemoirs of Georgia(2 vols., Atlanta, Ga., 1895) contains chapters on industrial conditions.
The principal sources for public administration are the annual reports of the state officers, philanthropic institutions, the prison commission and the railroad commission, and the revised Code of Georgia (Atlanta, 1896), adopted in 1895; see also L.F. Schmeckebier’s “Taxation in Georgia” (Johns Hopkins University Studies, vol. xviii.) and “Banking in Georgia” (Banker’s Magazine, vol. xlviii.). Education and social conditions are treated in C.E. Jones’sHistory of Education in Georgia(Washington, 1890), the Annual Reports of the School Commissioner, and various magazine articles, such as “Georgia Cracker in the Cotton Mill” (Century Magazine, vol. xix.) and “A Plea for Light” (South Atlantic Quarterly, vol. iii.). The view of slavery given in Frances A. Kemble’sJournal of a Residence on a Georgia Plantation in 1838-1839(New York, 1863) should be compared with R.Q. Mallard’sPlantation Life before Emancipation(Richmond, Va., 1897), and with F.L. Olmsted’sA Journey in the Seaboard Slave States(New York, 1856).
The best book for the entire field of Georgia history is Lawton B. Evans’sA Student’s History of Georgia(New York, 1898), a textbook for schools. This should be supplemented by C.C. Jones’sAntiquities of the Southern Indians, particularly of the Georgia Tribes(New York, 1873), for the aborigines; W.B. Stevens’sHistory of Georgia to 1798(2 vols., Philadelphia, 1847-1859) and C.C. Jones, jun., History of Georgia (2 vols., Boston, 1883) for the Colonial and Revolutionary periods; C.H. Haskins’sThe Yazoo Land Companies(Washington, 1891); the excellent monograph (mentioned above) by U.B. Phillips for politics prior to 1860; Miss Annie H. Abel’s monograph “The History of Events Resulting in Indian Consolidation West of the Mississippi,” in vol. i. of theAnnual Report of the American Historical Association for 1906(Washington, 1908) for a good account of the removal of the Indians from Georgia; the judicious monograph by E.C. Woolley,Reconstruction in Georgia(New York, 1901); and I.W. Avery’sHistory of Georgia from 1850 to 1881(New York, 1881), which is marred by prejudice but contains material of value.The Confederate Records of the State of Georgiawere published at Atlanta in 1909. See also: E.J. Harden’sLife of George M. Troup(Savannah, 1840); R.M. Johnston and W.H. Browne,Life of Alexander H. Stephens (Philadelphia, 1878), and Louis Pendleton, Life of Alexander H. Stephens(Philadelphia, 1907); P.A. Stovall’sRobert Toombs(New York, 1892); H. Fielder’sLife, Times and Speeches of Joseph E. Brown(Springfield, Mass., 1883) and C.C. Jones, jun.,Biographical Sketches of Delegates from Georgia to the Continental Congress(New York, 1891). There is much valuable material, also, in the publications (beginning with 1840) of the Georgia Historical Society (see the list in vol. ii. of theReport of the American Historical Associationfor 1905).
1According to the usual nomenclature, the branch flowing S.W. is called the Chattooga; this unites with the Tallulah to form the Tugaloo, which in turn unites with the Kiowee to form the Savannah proper.2The manufacturing statistics for 1900 which follow are not those given in the Twelfth Census, but are taken from theCensus of Manufactures, 1905, the 1900 figures here given being only for “establishments on a factory basis,” and thus being comparable with those of 1905. In 1890 there were 53 mills with a capital of $17,664,675 and a product valued at $12,035,629.3In these valuations for 1900 and for 1905 the rough lumber dressed or remanufactured in planing mills enters twice into the value of the product.4The population of the state was 82,548 in 1790, 162,686 in 1800, 252,433 in 1810, 340,989 in 1820, 516,823 in 1830, 691,392 in 1840, 906,185 in 1850, 1,057,286 in 1860, and 1,184,100 in 1870.5This negro percentage includes 211 Chinese, Japanese and Indians.6The state has had four other constitutions—those of 1777, 1789, 1798 and 1868.7Owing to the custom which holds in Georgia of choosing state senators in rotation from each of the counties making up a senatorial district, it happened in 1907 that few cities were represented directly by senators chosen from municipalities. It is believed that this fact contributed to the passage of the prohibition law.8De facto.9President of the Colony.10President of the Council of Safety.11President of Georgia.12First Governor under a State Constitution.13President Executive Council andde factoGovernor.14President of Senate.15Provisional.
1According to the usual nomenclature, the branch flowing S.W. is called the Chattooga; this unites with the Tallulah to form the Tugaloo, which in turn unites with the Kiowee to form the Savannah proper.
2The manufacturing statistics for 1900 which follow are not those given in the Twelfth Census, but are taken from theCensus of Manufactures, 1905, the 1900 figures here given being only for “establishments on a factory basis,” and thus being comparable with those of 1905. In 1890 there were 53 mills with a capital of $17,664,675 and a product valued at $12,035,629.
3In these valuations for 1900 and for 1905 the rough lumber dressed or remanufactured in planing mills enters twice into the value of the product.
4The population of the state was 82,548 in 1790, 162,686 in 1800, 252,433 in 1810, 340,989 in 1820, 516,823 in 1830, 691,392 in 1840, 906,185 in 1850, 1,057,286 in 1860, and 1,184,100 in 1870.
5This negro percentage includes 211 Chinese, Japanese and Indians.
6The state has had four other constitutions—those of 1777, 1789, 1798 and 1868.
7Owing to the custom which holds in Georgia of choosing state senators in rotation from each of the counties making up a senatorial district, it happened in 1907 that few cities were represented directly by senators chosen from municipalities. It is believed that this fact contributed to the passage of the prohibition law.
8De facto.
9President of the Colony.
10President of the Council of Safety.
11President of Georgia.
12First Governor under a State Constitution.
13President Executive Council andde factoGovernor.
14President of Senate.
15Provisional.
GEORGIA,a former kingdom of Transcaucasia, which existed historically for more than 2000 years. Its earliest name was Karthli or Karthveli; the Persians knew it as Gurjistan, the Romans and Greeks as Iberia, though the latter placed Colchis also in the west of Georgia. Vrastan is the Armenian name and Gruzia the Russian. Georgia proper, which included Karthli and Kakhetia, was bounded on the N. by Ossetia and Daghestan, on the S. by the principalities of Erivan and Kars, and on the W. by Guria and Imeretia; but the kingdom also included at different times Guria, Mingrelia, Abkhasia, Imeretia and Daghestan, and extended from the Caucasus range on the N. to the Aras or Araxes on the S. It is now divided between the Russian governments of Tiflis and Kutais, under which headings further geographical particulars are given. (See alsoCaucasia.)
History.—According to traditional accounts, the Georgian (Karthlian), Kakhetian, Lesghian, Mingrelian and other races of Transcaucasia are the descendants of Thargamos, great-grandson of Japheth, son of Noah, though Gen. x. 3 makes Togarmah to be the son of Gomer, who was the son of Japheth. These various races were subsequently known under the general name of Thargamosides. Karthlos, the second son of Thargamos, is the eponymous king of his race, their country being called Karthli after him. Mtskhethos, son of Karthlos, founded the city of Mtskhetha (the modern Mtskhet) and made it the capital of his kingdom. We come, however, to firmer historic ground when we read that Georgia was conquered by Alexander the Great, or rather by one of his generals. The Macedonian yoke was shaken off by Pharnavaz or Pharnabazus, a prince of the royal race, who ruled from 302 to 237B.C.All through its history Georgia, being on the outskirts of Armenia and Persia, both ofthem more powerful neighbours than itself, was at times more or less closely affected by their destinies. In this way it was sometimes opposed to Rome, sometimes on terms of friendship with Byzantium, according as these were successively friendly or hostile to the Armenians and the Persians. In the end of the 2nd centuryB.C.the last Pharnavazian prince was dethroned by his own subjects and the crown given to Arsaces, king of Armenia, whose son Arshag, ascending the throne of Georgia in 93B.C., established there the Arsacid dynasty. This close association with Armenia brought upon the country an invasion (65B.C.) by the Roman general Pompey, who was then at war with Mithradates, king of Pontus and Armenia; but Pompey did not establish his power permanently over Iberia. A hundred and eighty years later the Emperor Trajan penetrated (A.D.114) into the heart of the country, and chastised the Georgians; yet his conquest was only a little more permanent than Pompey’s. During one of the internecine quarrels, which were not infrequent in Georgia, the throne fell to Mirhan or Mirian (265-342), a son of the Persian king, who had married a daughter of Asphagor, the last sovereign of the Arsacid dynasty.
With Mirian begins the Sassanian dynasty. He and his subjects were converted to Christianity by a nun Nuno (Nino), who had escaped from the religious persecutions of Tiridates, king of Armenia. Mirian erected the first Christian church in Georgia on the site now occupied by the cathedral of Mtskhet. In or about the year 371 Georgia was overrun by the Persian king Shapur or Sapor II., and in 379 a Persian general built the stronghold of Tphilis (afterwards Tiflis) as a counterpoise to Mtskhet. The Persian grasp upon Georgia was loosened by Tiridates, who reigned from 393 to 405. One of Mirian’s successors, Vakhtang (446-499), surnamed Gurgaslan or Gurgasal, the Wolf-Lion, established a patriarchate at Mtskhet and made Tphilis his capital. This sovereign, having conquered Mingrelia and Abkhasia, and subdued the Ossetes, made himself master of a large part of Armenia. Then, co-operating for once with the king of Persia, he led an army into India; but towards the end of his reign there was enmity between him and the Persians, against whom he warred unsuccessfully. His son Dachi or Darchil (499-514) upon ascending the throne transferred the seat of government permanently from Mtskhet to Tphilis (Tiflis). Again Persia stretched out her hand over Georgia, and proved a formidable menace to the existence of the kingdom, until, owing to the severe pressure of the Turks on the one side and of the Byzantine Greeks on the other, she found it expedient to relax her grasp. The Georgians, seizing the opportunity, appealed (571) to the Byzantine emperor, Justin II. who gave them a king in the person of Guaram, a prince of the Bagratid family of Armenia, conferring upon him the title, not of king, but of viceroy. Thus began the dynasty of the Bagratids, who ruled until 1803.
This was not, however, the first time that Byzantine influence had been effectively exercised in Georgia. As early as the reign of Mirian, in the 3rd century, the organizers of the early Georgian church had looked to Byzantium, the leading Christian power in the East, for both instruction and guidance, and the connexion thus begun had been strengthened as time went on. From this period until the Arab (i.e.Mahommedan) invasions began, the authority of Byzantium was supreme in Georgia. Some seventy years after the Bagratids began to rule in Georgia the all-conquering Arabs appeared on the frontiers of the country, and for the next one hundred and eighty years they frequently devastated the land, compelling its inhabitants again and again to accept Islam at the sword’s point. But it was not until the death of the Georgian king Ashod (787-826) that they completely subdued the Caucasian state and imposed their will upon it. Nevertheless they were too much occupied elsewhere or too indifferent to its welfare to defend it against alien aggressors, for in 842 Bogha, a Turkish chief, invaded the country, and early in the 10th century the Persians again overran it. But a period of relief from these hostile incursions was afforded by the reign of Bagrat III. (980-1014). During his father’s lifetime he had been made king of Abkhasia, his mother belonging to the royal house of that land, and after ascending the Georgian throne he made his power felt far beyond the frontiers of his hereditary dominions, until his kingdom extended from the Black Sea to the Caspian, while Armenia, Azerbaijan and Kirman all paid him tribute. Not only did he encourage learning and patronize the fine arts, but he built, in 1003, the cathedral at Kutais, one of the finest examples extant of Georgian architecture. During the reign of Bagrat IV. (1027-1072) the Seljuk Turks more than once burst, after 1048, into the country from Asia Minor, but they were on the whole successfully repulsed, although they plundered Tiflis. During the reign of the next king, George II., they again devastated Tiflis. But once more fortune changed after the accession of David II. (1089-1125), surnamed the Renovator, one of the greatest of Georgian kings. With the help of the Kipchaks, a Mongol or Turkish race, from the steppe lands to the north of the Caucasus, whom he admitted into his country, David drove the Seljuks out of his domains and forced them back over the Armenian mountains. Under George III. (1156-1184), a grandson of David II., Armenia was in part conquered, and Ani, one of its capitals, taken. George’s daughter Thamar or Tamara, who succeeded him, reigned over the kingdom as left by David II. and further extended her power over Trebizond, Erzerum, Tovin (in Armenia) and Kars. These successes were continued by her son George IV. (1212-1223), who conquered Ganja (now Elisavetpol) and repulsed the attacks of the Persians; but in the last years of his reign there appeared (1220 and 1222) the people who were to prove the ruin of Georgia, namely the Mongol hosts of Jenghiz Khan, led by his sons. George IV. was succeeded by his sister Rusudan, whose capital was twice captured by the Persians and her kingdom overrun and fearfully devastated by the Mongols in 1236. Then, after a period of wonderful recovery under George V. (1318-1346), who conquered Imeretia and reunited it to his crown, Georgia was again twice (1386 and 1393-1394) desolated by the Mongols under Timur (Tamerlane), prince of Samarkand, who on the second occasion laid waste the entire country with fire and sword, and crushed it under his relentless heel until the year 1403. Alexander I. (1413-1442) freed his country from the last of the Mongols, but at the end of his reign divided his territory between his three sons, whom he made sovereigns of Imeretia, Kakhetia and Karthli (Georgia) respectively. The first mentioned remained a separate state until its annexation to Russia in 1810; the other two were soon reunited.
Political relations between Russia and Georgia began in the end of the same century, namely in 1492, when the king of Kakhetia sought the protection of Ivan III. during a war between the Turks and the Persians. In the 17th century the two states were brought into still closer relationship. In 1619, when Georgia was harried by Shah Abbas of Persia, Theimuraz (1629-1634), king of Georgia, appealed for help to Michael, the first of the Romanov tsars of Russia, and his example was followed later in the century by the rulers of other petty Thargamosid or Caucasian states, namely Imeretia and Guria. In 1638 the prince of Mingrelia took the oath of allegiance to the Russian tsar, and in 1650 the same step was taken by the prince of Imeretia. Vakhtang VI. of Georgia put himself under the protection of Peter the Great early in the 18th century. When Persia fell into the grip of the Afghans early in the 18th century the Turks seized the opportunity, and, ousting the Persians from Georgia, captured Tiflis and compelled Vakhtang to abdicate. But in 1735 they renounced all claim to supremacy over the Caucasian states. This left Persia with the predominating influence, for though Peter the Great extorted from Persia (1722) her prosperous provinces beside the Caspian, he left the mountaineers to their own dynastic quarrels. Heraclius II. of Georgia declared himself the vassal of Russia in 1783, and when, twelve years later, he was hard pressed by Agha Mahommed, shah of Persia, who seized Tiflis and laid it in ruins, he appealed to Russia for help. The appeal was again renewed by the next king of Georgia, George XIII., in 1798, and in the following year he renounced his crown in favour of the tsar, and in 1801 Georgia was converted into a Russian province. The state of Guria submitted to Russia in 1829.
(J. T. Be.)
Ethnology.—Of the three main groups into which the Caucasian races are now usually divided, the Georgian is in every respect the most important and interesting. It has accordingly largely occupied the attention of Orientalists almost incessantly from the days of Klaproth. Yet such are the difficulties connected with the origin and mutual relations of the Caucasian peoples that its affinities are still far from being clearly established. Anton von Schiefner and P.V. Uslar, however, arrived at some negative conclusions valuable as starting-points for further research. In their papers, published in theMemoirsof the St Petersburg Imperial Academy of Sciences and elsewhere (1859 et seq.), they finally disposed of the views of Bopp and Brosset (1836), who attempted on linguistic grounds to connect the Georgians with the Indo-European family. They also clearly show that Max Müller’s “Turanian” theory is untenable, and they go a long way towards proving that the Georgian, with all the other Caucasian languages except the Ossetian, forms a distinct linguistic family absolutely independent of all others. This had already been suspected by Klaproth, and the same conclusion was arrived at by Fr. Müller and Zagarelli.
Uslar’s “Caucasian Family” comprises the following three great divisions:
1. Western Group. Typical races: Circassians and Abkhasians.2. Eastern Group. Typical races: Chechens and Lesghians.3. Southern Group. Typical race: Georgians.
1. Western Group. Typical races: Circassians and Abkhasians.
2. Eastern Group. Typical races: Chechens and Lesghians.
3. Southern Group. Typical race: Georgians.
Here the term “family” must be taken in a far more elastic sense than when applied, for instance, to the Indo-European, Semitic or Eastern Polynesian divisions of mankind. Indeed the three groups present at least as wide divergences as are found to exist between the Semitic and Hamitic linguistic families. Thus, while the Abkhasian of group 1 is still at the agglutinating, the Lesghian of group 2 has fairly reached the inflecting stage, and the Georgian seems still to waver between the two. In consequence of these different stages of development, Uslar hesitated finally to fix the position of Georgian in the family, regarding it as possibly a connecting link between groups 1 and 2, but possibly also radically distinct from both.
Including all its numerous ramifications, the Georgian or southern group occupies the greater part of Transcaucasia, reaching from about the neighbourhood of Batum on the Black Sea eastwards to the Caspian, and merging southwards with the Armenians of Aryan stock. It comprises altogether nine subdivisions, as in the subjoined table:
1. TheGeorgians Proper, who are the Iberians of the ancients and the Grusians of the Russians, but who call themselves Karthlians, and who in medieval times were masters of the Rion and Upper Kura as far as its confluence with the Alazan.2. TheImeretians, west of the Suram mountains as far as the river Tskheniz-Tskhali.3. TheGurians, between the Rion and Lazistan.4. TheLazisof Lazistan on the Black Sea.5. TheSvanetians, ShvansorSwanians, on the Upper Ingur and Tskheniz-Tskhali rivers.6. TheMingrelians, between the rivers Tskheniz-Tskhali, Rion, Ingur and the Black Sea.7. TheTushesorMosoksabout the headstreams of the Alazan and Yora rivers.8. ThePshavsorPh’chavy9. TheKhevsurs
1. TheGeorgians Proper, who are the Iberians of the ancients and the Grusians of the Russians, but who call themselves Karthlians, and who in medieval times were masters of the Rion and Upper Kura as far as its confluence with the Alazan.
2. TheImeretians, west of the Suram mountains as far as the river Tskheniz-Tskhali.
3. TheGurians, between the Rion and Lazistan.
4. TheLazisof Lazistan on the Black Sea.
5. TheSvanetians, ShvansorSwanians, on the Upper Ingur and Tskheniz-Tskhali rivers.
6. TheMingrelians, between the rivers Tskheniz-Tskhali, Rion, Ingur and the Black Sea.
7. TheTushesorMosoks
8. ThePshavsorPh’chavy
9. TheKhevsurs
The representative branch of the race has always been the Karthlians. It is now pretty well established that the Georgians are the descendants of the aborigines of the Pambak highlands, and that they found their way to their present homes from the south-east some four or five thousand years ago, possibly under pressure from the great waves of Aryan migration flowing from the Iranian tableland westwards to Asia Minor and Europe. The Georgians proper are limited on the east by the Alazan, on the north by the Caucasus, on the west by the Meskes hills, separating them from the Imeretians, and on the south by the Kura river and Kara-dagh and Pambak mountains. Southwards, however, no hard and fast ethnical line can be drawn, for even immediately south of Tiflis, Georgians, Armenians and Tatars are found intermingled confusedly together.
The Georgian race, which represents the oldest elements of civilization in the Caucasus, is distinguished by some excellent mental qualities, and is especially noted for personal courage and a passionate love of music. The people, however, are described as fierce and cruel, and addicted to intemperance, though Max von Thielmann (Journey in the Caucasus, &c., 1875) speaks of them as “rather hard drinkers than drunkards.” Physically they are a fine athletic race of pure Caucasian type; hence during the Moslem ascendancy Georgia supplied, next to Circassia, the largest number of female slaves for the Turkish harems and of recruits for the Osmanli armies, more especially for the select corps of the famous Mamelukes.
The social organization rested on a highly aristocratic basis, and the lowest classes were separated by several grades of vassalage from the highest. But since their incorporation with the Russian empire, these relations have become greatly modified, and a more sharply defined middle class of merchants, traders and artisans has been developed. The power of life and death, formerly claimed and freely exercised by the nobles over their serfs, has also been expressly abolished. The Georgians are altogether at present in a fairly well-to-do condition, and under Russian administration they have become industrious, and have made considerable moral and material progress.
Missionaries sent by Constantine the Great introduced Christianity about the beginning of the 4th century. Since that time the people have, notwithstanding severe pressure from surrounding Mahommedan communities, remained faithful to the principles of Christianity, and are still amongst the most devoted adherents of the Orthodox Greek Church. Indeed it was their attachment to the national religion that caused them to call in the aid of the Christian Muscovites against the proselytizing attempts of the Shiite Persians—a step which ultimately brought about their political extinction.
As already stated, the Karthli language is not only fundamentally distinct from the Indo-European linguistic family, but cannot be shown to possess any clearly ascertained affinities with either of the two northern Caucasian groups. It resembles them chiefly in its phonetic system, so that according to Rosen (Sprache der Lazen) all the languages of central and western Caucasus might be adequately rendered by the Georgian alphabet. Though certainly not so harsh as the Avar, Lesghian and other Daghestan languages, it is very far from being euphonious, and the frequent recurrence of such sounds asts, ds, thz, kh, khh, gh(Arab.غ),q(Arab.ق), for all of which there are distinct characters, renders its articulation rather more energetic and rugged than is agreeable to ears accustomed to the softer tones of the Iranian and western Indo-European tongues. It presents great facilities for composition, the laws of which are very regular. Its peculiar morphology, standing midway between agglutination and true inflexion, is well illustrated by its simple declension common to noun, adjective and pronoun, and its more intricate verbal conjugation, with its personal endings, seven tenses and incorporation of pronominal subject and object, all showing decided progress towards the inflecting structure of the Indo-European and Semitic tongues.
Georgian is written in a native alphabet obviously based on the Armenian, and like it attributed to St Mesropius (Mesrop), who flourished in the 5th century. Of this alphabet there are two forms, differing so greatly in outline and even in the number of the letters that they might almost be regarded as two distinct alphabetic systems. The first and oldest, used exclusively in the Bible and liturgical works, is the square or monumental Khutsuri,i.e.“sacerdotal,” consisting of 38 letters, and approaching the Armenian in appearance. The second is the Mkhedrūli khēli,i.e.“soldier’s hand,” used in ordinary writing, and consisting of 40 letters, neatly shaped and full of curves, hence at first sight not unlike the modern Burmese form of the Pali.
Of the Karthli language there are several varieties; and, besides those comprised in the above table, mention should be made of the Kakhetian current in the historic province of Kakhetia. A distinction is sometimes drawn between the Karthlians proper and the Kakhetians, but it rests on a purely political basis, having originated with the partition in 1424 of the ancient Iberianestates into the three new kingdoms of Karthlinia, Kakhetia and Imeretia. On the other hand, both the Laz of Lazistan and the Svanetian present such serious structural and verbal differences from the common type that they seem to stand rather in the relation of sister tongues than of dialects to the Georgian proper. All derive obviously from a common source, but have been developed independently of each other. The Tush or Mosok appears to be fundamentally a Kistinian or Chechen idiom affected by Georgian influences.
The Bible is said to have been translated into Georgian as early as the 5th century. The extant version, however, dates only from the 8th century, and is attributed to St Euthymius. But even so, it is far the most ancient work known to exist in the language. Next in importance is, perhaps, the curious poem entitledThe Amours of Turiel and Nestan Darejan, orThe man clothed in the panther’s skin, attributed to Rustevel, who lived during the prosperous reign of Queen Thamar (11th century). Other noteworthy compositions are the national epics of theBaramianiand theRostomiani, and the prose romances ofVisramianiandDarejaniani, the former by Sarg of Thmogvi, the latter by Mosi of Khoni. Apart from these, the great bulk of Georgian literature consists of ecclesiastical writings, hymns sacred and profane, national codes and chronicles.
Bibliography.—The standard authority on the history is M.F. Brosset’s translation of the Georgian chronicles under the title ofHistoire de la Géorgie(5 vols., St Petersburg, 1849-1858); but compare also Khakanov,Histoire de Géorgie(Paris, 1900). See further A. Leist,Das georgische Volk(Dresden, 1903); M. de Villeneuve,La Géorgie(Paris, 1870); O. Wardrop,The Kingdom of Georgia(London, 1888); and Langlois,Numismatique géorgienne(Paris, 1860). For the philology see Zagarelli,Examen de la littérature relative à la grammaire géorgienne(1873);Friedrich Müller, Grundriss der Sprachwissenschaft(1887), iii. 2; Leist,Georgische Dichter(1887); Erskert,Sprachen des kaukasischen Stammes(1895). For other points as to anthropology, Michel Smirnow’s paper inRevue d’anthropologie(April 15, 1878); Chantre,Recherches anthropologiques dans le Caucase(1885-1887); and Erckert,Der Kaukasus und seine Völker(1887).
Bibliography.—The standard authority on the history is M.F. Brosset’s translation of the Georgian chronicles under the title ofHistoire de la Géorgie(5 vols., St Petersburg, 1849-1858); but compare also Khakanov,Histoire de Géorgie(Paris, 1900). See further A. Leist,Das georgische Volk(Dresden, 1903); M. de Villeneuve,La Géorgie(Paris, 1870); O. Wardrop,The Kingdom of Georgia(London, 1888); and Langlois,Numismatique géorgienne(Paris, 1860). For the philology see Zagarelli,Examen de la littérature relative à la grammaire géorgienne(1873);Friedrich Müller, Grundriss der Sprachwissenschaft(1887), iii. 2; Leist,Georgische Dichter(1887); Erskert,Sprachen des kaukasischen Stammes(1895). For other points as to anthropology, Michel Smirnow’s paper inRevue d’anthropologie(April 15, 1878); Chantre,Recherches anthropologiques dans le Caucase(1885-1887); and Erckert,Der Kaukasus und seine Völker(1887).
GEORGIAN BAY,the N.E. section of Lake Huron, separated from it by Manitoulin Island and the peninsula comprising the counties of Grey and Bruce, Ontario. It is about 100 m. long and 50 m. wide, and is said to contain 30,000 islands. It receives numerous rivers draining a large extent of country; of these the chief are the French river draining Lake Nipissing, the Maganatawan draining a number of small lakes, the Muskoka draining the Muskoka chain of lakes (Muskoka, Rosseau, Joseph, &c.) and the Severn draining Lake Simcoe. Into its southern extremity, known as Nottawasaga Bay, flows the river of the same name. The Trent valley canal connects Georgian Bay with the Bay of Quinte and Lake Ontario, and a canal system has long been projected to Montreal by way of the French and Ottawa rivers and Lake Nipissing.
GEORGSWALDE,a town of Bohemia, Austria, 115 m. N.E. of Prague by rail. Pop. (1900) 8131, including Neu-Georgswalde, Wiesenthal and Philippsdorf, which form together a single commune. Georgswalde is one of the oldest industrial places of Bohemia, and together with the neighbouring town of Rumburg is the principal centre of the linen industry. The village of Philippsdorf, now incorporated with Georgswalde, has become since 1866 a famous place of pilgrimage, owing to the miracles attributed to an image of the Virgin, placed now in a magnificent new church (1885).
GEPHYREA,the name used for several groups of worm-like animals with certain resemblances but of doubtful affinity. In the article “Annelida” in the 9th edition of this Encyclopaedia, W.C. McIntosh followed the accepted view in associating in this group theEchiuridae,SipunculidaeandPriapulidae. E. Ray Lankester, in the preface to the English translation of C. Gegenbaur’sComparative Anatomy(1878), added thePhoronidaeto these forms. Afterwards the same author (article “Zoology,”Ency. Brit., 9th ed.) recognized that thePhoronidaehad other affinities, and placed the other “gephyreans” in association with the Polyzoa as the two classes of a phylumPodaxonia. In the present state of knowledge the old groupGephyreais broken up intoEchiuroidea(q.v.) orGephyrea armata, which are certainly Annelids; theSipunculoidea(q.v.) orGephyrea achaeta, an independent group, certainly coelomate, but of doubtful affinity; thePriapuloidea(q.v.), equally of doubtful affinity; and thePhoronidea(q.v.), which are almost certainlyHemichordata.
GERA,a town of Germany, capital of the principality of Reuss-Schleiz (called also Reuss younger line), situated in a valley on the banks of the White Elster, 45 m. S.S.W. of Leipzig on the railway to Probstzella. Pop. (1885) 34,152; (1905) 47,455. It has been mostly rebuilt since a great fire in 1780, and the streets are in general wide and straight, and contain many handsome houses. There are three Evangelical churches and one Roman Catholic. Among other noteworthy buildings are the handsome town-hall (1576, afterwards restored) and the theatre (1902). Its educational establishments include a gymnasium, a commercial and a weaving school. The castle of Osterstein, the residence of the princes of Reuss, dates from the 9th century, but has been almost entirely rebuilt in modern times. Gera is noted for its industrial activity. Its industries include wool-weaving and spinning, dyeing, iron-founding, the manufacture of cotton and silk goods, machinery, sewing machines and machine oil, leather and tobacco, and printing (books and maps) and flower gardening.
Gera (in ancient chroniclesGeraha) was raised to the rank of a town in the 11th century, at which time it belonged to the counts of Groitch. In the 12th century it came into the possession of the lords of Reuss. It was stormed and sacked by the Bohemians in 1450, was two-thirds burned down by the Swedes in 1639 during the Thirty Years’ War, and suffered afterwards from great conflagrations in 1686 and 1780, being in the latter year almost completely destroyed.
GERALDTON,a town in the district of Victoria, West Australia, on Champion Bay, 306 m. by rail N.W. of Perth. Pop. (1901) 2593. It is the seat of a Roman Catholic bishop, an important seaport carrying on a considerable trade with the surrounding gold-fields and agricultural districts, the centre of a considerable railway system and an increasingly popular seaside resort. The harbour is safe and extensive, having a pier affording accommodation for large steamers. The chief exports are gold, copper, lead, wool and sandalwood.
GÉRANDO, MARIE JOSEPH DE(1772-1842), French philosopher, was born at Lyons on the 29th of February 1772. When the city was besieged in 1793 by the armies of the Republic, de Gérando took up arms, was made prisoner and with difficulty escaped with his life. He took refuge in Switzerland, whence he afterwards fled to Naples. In 1796 the establishment of the Directory allowed him to return to France. At the age of twenty-five he enlisted as a private in a cavalry regiment. About this time the Institute proposed as a subject for an essay this question,—“What is the influence of symbols on the faculty of thought?” De Gérando gained the prize, and heard of his success after the battle of Zürich, in which he had distinguished himself. This literary triumph was the first step in his upward career. In 1799 he was attached to the ministry of the interior by Lucien Bonaparte; in 1804 he became general secretary under Champagny; in 1805 he accompanied Napoleon into Italy; in 1808 he was nominated master of requests; in 1811 he received the title of councillor of state; and in the following year he was appointed governor of Catalonia. On the overthrow of the empire, de Gérando was allowed to retain this office; but having been sent during the hundred days into the department of the Moselle to organize the defence of that district, he was punished at the second Restoration by a few months of neglect. He was soon after, however, readmitted into the council of state, where he distinguished himself by the prudence and conciliatory tendency of his views. In 1819 he opened at the law-school of Paris a class of public and administrative law, which in 1822 was suppressed by government, but was reopened six years later under the Martignac ministry. In 1837 he was made a baron. He died at Paris on the 9th of November 1842.
De Gérando’s best-known work is hisHistoire comparée des systèmes de philosophie relativement aux principes des connaissances humaines(Paris, 1804, 3 vols.). The germ of this workhad already appeared in the author’sMémoire de la génération des connaissances humaines(Berlin, 1802), which was crowned by the Academy of Berlin. In it de Gérando, after a rapid review of ancient and modern speculations on the origin of our ideas, singles out the theory of primary ideas, which he endeavours to combat under all its forms. The latter half of the work, devoted to the analysis of the intellectual faculties, is intended to show how all human knowledge is the result of experience; and reflection is assumed as the source of our ideas of substance, of unity and of identity. It is divided into two parts, the first of which is purely historical, and devoted to an exposition of various philosophical systems; in the second, which comprises fourteen chapters of the entire work, the distinctive characters and value of these systems are compared and discussed. In spite of the disadvantage that it is impossible to separate advantageously the history and critical examination of any doctrine in the arbitrary manner which de Gérando chose, the work has great merits. In correctness of detail and comprehensiveness of view it was greatly superior to every work of the same kind that had hitherto appeared in France. During the Empire and the first years of the Restoration, de Gérando found time to prepare a second edition (Paris, 1822, 4 vols.), which is enriched with so many additions that it may pass for an entirely new work. The last chapter of the part published during the author’s lifetime ends with the revival of letters and the philosophy of the 15th century. The second part, carrying the work down to the close of the 18th century, was published posthumously by his son in 4 vols. (Paris, 1847). Twenty-three chapters of this were left complete by the author in manuscript; the remaining three were supplied from other sources, chiefly printed but unpublished memoirs.
His essayDu perfectionnement moral et de l’éducation de soi-mêmewas crowned by the French Academy in 1825. The fundamental idea of this work is that human life is in reality only a great education, of which perfection is the aim.