The author of the peer-reviewed monograph is Professor Giuli Alasania, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of the I. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University and Vice-Rector of the International Black Sea University (Georgia).

Alasania is known for her research on the medieval history of Georgia and numerous publications not only in Georgia, but also in English-speaking countries. She is well versed in the information of Georgian sources, is well aware of the opinions and versions of many Georgian scientists on controversial or ambiguous problematic issues of the country's history. She is also well acquainted with the Armenian, Arabic, Persian, and Byzantine (Greek) sources of the period. The list of references includes almost all publications of Georgian narrative sources known in science, biographies of saints, martyrdom of saints, and extensive hagiographic literature (pp. XXXVI-XLV). All this allows the author to compare data from diverse sources and draw important conclusions on issues related to the history of Georgia and international relations in the South Caucasus and the Middle East, which are still controversial among specialists today.

The reviewed monograph is positioned as a review of the relations of Turkic tribes and peoples with Georgia (more generally, the Turkic world ) in retrospect from the third to the ninth centuries, but the scope of the work is much broader - it delves into the historical realities of the XI-XII centuries and addresses some issues of the XVI-XVII centuries.
Structurally, the work consists of a" Recommended Preface " by Professor G. Japaridze, an author's preface and introduction, a list of references (p. XLVI-LXVI) and sources, as well as 8 main chapters of the author's research.

The first chapter is entitled "Bun-Turks according to Georgian written sources". It examines the news (largely legendary and not confirmed by other sources) "Moktsevai Kartlis "("Appeal of Georgia") on the Bun-Turks in the time of Alexander the Great, living on the banks of the Kura River (p. 1-23). It is known that the first information about the Ashina Turks dates back to the VI century AD and there is no historical written data about the Turks in the time of Alexander the Great (IV century BC), especially on the banks of the Kura River [Istoriya Vostoka, vol. 1, 2000, pp. 275-276, 287-289]. It is known that runic writings in the Altai, according to S. G. Klyashtorny, date back to the VI-X centuries AD [Klyashtorny, 1964, p. 44-70; aka, 1973, p. 254-264; aka, 1980, p. 82-95]1. According to this author, the initial stage of formation (genesis) The Turkic ethnolinguistic community took place on the basis of the Ashina tribes in East Turkestan and Western China in the period from the third century. Until the end of the fifth century, and already in the sixth century, the Ashina came into contact with the Sassanid Persian state through Central Asia and from that time became known beyond the Altai and Western Mongolia [Kryukov, 1988, pp. 264-265]. Thus, no" Bun-Turks " are known to science in the time of Alexander the Great, and the attempts of a number of Turkish scientists to declare any nomadic peoples of antiquity (Scythians, Cimmerians, Sarmatians, etc.) as Turks are untenable due to their political bias and the lack of any reasonable argumentation based on generally accepted scientific forms of proof.

Quoting an excerpt from the manuscript of Leonti Mroveli about 28 Turkic families (clans) who settled on the banks of the Kura River near Mtskheta and came from Khazaria (p. 3), the author of the monograph connects them with the campaigns of Alexander the Great (IV century BC). However, it is known that the Khazars created their state around 651 AD. [Artamonov, 2001, pp. 116-117, 179-181; Novoseltsev, 1990, pp. 47-55] and only after this date can we talk about the country of Khazaria. In fact, we are

MARKARYAN Samvel Asaturovich-Candidate of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor, Yerevan State University, markaryansamvel@rambler.ru.

1 Here we can also recall the relevant studies of the Turkic and Uyghur written monuments by A. N. Bernshtam, I. A. Batmanov, A. N. Kononov, L. Yu. Tugushev and others. All of them came to similar conclusions on the dating of runic inscriptions.

page 197
we are dealing with an anachronism in the text of Leontius Mroveli. The same kind of anachronisms associated with the mention of the Khazars in connection with the events of the third and fourth centuries AD in the manuscripts of Movses Khorenapi and Movses Kalankatuatsi were convincingly debunked in his monograph by M. I. Artamonov.

Contacts with the Huns, who lived in the steppe expanses of the North Caucasus since the fourth century, are more real. We can agree with the opinion of V. Gabashvili, who suggested that the term "Bun-Turks" should be used only for Huns (Gabashvili, 1971, pp. 45-46). At the same time, it should be remembered that the Huns were a complex syncretic combination of various ethnic units of both Mongoloid and Ugro-Finnish and possibly only partially Proto-Turkic origin. This conglomerate of nomadic and sedentary peoples is called "ancient Turkic" only by Turkish scholars without sufficient grounds.

The monograph presents the opinions of V. V. Barthold, M. I. Artamonov, and L. N. Gumilev that the term "Turk" appeared in the fifth century, but became known to neighbors and other states only from the sixth century AD (pp. 8-9). On pages 10-11, the author speaks about "the amazing cohabitation of the pre-Muslim Turks with foreign tribes" (the opinion of G. V. Tsulai, with which, judging by the presentation, the author of the monograph agrees). If we recall the individual migrations of Turkic tribes in the first half of the 1st millennium to the Georgian regions of Kartli and Kakheti and their rather rapid assimilation here, we should rather conclude that the conformism of the Turkic tribes of the V-VI centuries, who easily perceived the culture of settled Georgian tribes and changed the nature of economic activity. After all, there was no compact nomadic population in Kartli or Kakheti in the VIII-X centuries, judging by multilingual sources. By the way, the same thesis can be made about the migration of Kipchaks (Polovtsians) to Georgia by Tsar David the Builder at the beginning of the 12th century, who were defeated in the crusades of 1103, 1111, and 1116 and pushed back to the North Caucasus by Vladimir Monomakh (Novoseltsev, 1968, pp. 216-217; 275-277). Already in the XIII century and even more so in the XIV century. There is almost no mention of the Kipchaks in Georgia in the sources, which indicates the complete assimilation and dissolution of migrants among the Georgian tribes. Possible objections here may be related to the fact that a significant part of the Kipchaks (Polovtsians) migrated back to the steppes of the North Caucasus at the end of the 12th and during the 13th centuries. This thesis can be taken into account, but even if a part of the Kipchaks remained in Kartli or Kakheti, they did not survive as a separate ethnic group (recall the Pechenegs in Hungary, who have been living in the east of this country for 900 years as a separate ethno-confessional group and do not mix with the indigenous population). Traces of these Kipchaks can be seen in some Georgian surnames with Kipchak roots [Djaparidze, 1993, p. 130].

The second chapter examines in more detail the relations between Georgians and pre-Islamic Turks. It is titled: "Georgians and pre-Islamic Turks at the beginning of the Middle Ages". Here we consider relations with the nomadic tribes of the Bulgars-Kutrigurs, Onogurs, Saragurs, Utrigurs, Huns and Khazars, Sabirs. Here, the relations and military-political contacts with the Huns of the Georgian king Vakhtang Gorgasal are considered separately, and the date of his death is specified. There is no exact date in the sources, but based on the fact that after 503 references to him in the sources disappear, it was still accepted to consider this date as the last year of Vakhtang Gorgasal's life. G. Alasania studied historical and hagiographic Georgian, Arab, and Byzantine sources and came to the conclusion that the opinion about the death of this king in 491 (V. Goiladze), as well as in 531 (Z. Buniyatov) or in 522 (K. Tumanov) does not correspond to reality. The author disagrees with the opinion of well-known Armenian historians M. Chamchyan, S. Eremyan and K. Yuzbashyan that King Vakhtang Gorgasal most likely died before the beginning of the VI century, namely in the 490s (p. 55). But it does not accept the traditional date established in Georgian historiography, 503. The author of the monograph quite reasonably believes that if in 508 the king of Kartli Vakhtang Gorgasal opposed the invading Huns and Sabirs from the North Caucasus, then it is quite obvious that he was still alive in 508 (p.60). Therefore, G. Alasania believes that the king of Kartli Vakhtang Gorgasal died after 508 (probably between 510 and 517).

D. M. Dunlop's opinion on the mass migration of Khazars to the South Caucasus during the reign of the Sasanian kings Kavad (488-531) and Khosrov Anushirvan (531-579) [Dunlop, 1954, p.22]2 is critically perceived, since only one case of such migration of Khazars to the South Caucasus is known during this period (pp. 50-51).

2 Dan D. Shapira, a professor at Tel Aviv University, discussed this issue in more detail in his study [Shapira, 2007, p. 316-321 ]. D. Shapira concludes that there were no mass migrations of Khazars to the South Caucasus (Georgia, Albania, and Armenia), and sources speak of only one such case in VI b. with the participation of several thousand Khazars.

page 198
The Armenian chronicler Movses Kalankatuatsi speaks about the Khazar invasion of Albania in the second year of the reign of Shahanshah Khosrov Anushirvan (532) [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, pp. 69-70]. Concerning the question of what kind of khagan could have led this campaign at that time, if the Khazar state appeared in the middle of the 7th century, the author of the monograph gives various versions - these could have been the tribes of the Bulgars, Alan-Barsils and other nomads of the North Caucasus. But the term "Khazar" in the text of Movses Kalankatuatsi, according to I. Markwart, M. I. Artamonov, G. Japaridze, is clearly doubtful for the events of 532 (pp. 70-72). This passage in the manuscript of Movses Kalankatuatsi can be explained by the fact that he wrote his book in the tenth century and was well aware that the steppe expanses of the North Caucasus were occupied by the Khazars in his time. Therefore, the events of the VI century. it connects with the name Khazar.

The situation with the Khazar invasions of the South Caucasus worsened with the beginning of the Arab conquests. By the end of the eighth century, the Khazars finally pushed the Bulgar tribes back to the Azov and Black Seas, but instead of the Bulgar tribes, they had to hold off the Arab armies for almost 150 years. Wars, campaigns and clashes became especially regular after the establishment of the Arabs in Eastern Georgia, Albania and Armenia in 656 (Markaryan, 2012-2013, p. 71-72).Salman ibn Rabi'i's campaign through Derbent to Khazaria also belongs to this period (p. 101). Later authors write that Salman had 4 thousand Muslim warriors and was surrounded by 300 thousand Khazar nomad troops. However, according to the manuscript of Caliph al-Usfuri, Salman ibn Rabi'i had 11 thousand soldiers, who were surrounded near the city of Balanjar and completely exterminated [Reports of Caliph al-Usfuri..., 2000, p. 36]. In 662-664, according to Movses Kalankatuatsi, the Arabs again invaded the Khazar lands through Albania and Derbent. In response, the Khazars invaded Albania, Eastern Georgia, and Armenia in 681-685 and destroyed Arab garrisons there (p. 103). The Armenian historian Asohik reports on these Arab invasions [Asohik..., 1864, p. 71]. A few years later, the Khazars repeated their incursions. Of course, these invasions ravaged Albania and Eastern Georgia, but they weakened Arab rule in the South Caucasus and forced the Arabs to make concessions to local peoples in order to recruit soldiers or allied troops from the countries of the South Caucasus against the Khazars.

Further, the reviewed monograph contains reports of Khazar invasions in the late 7th-early 8th centuries by Armenian historians Gevond and Vardan the Great (13th century) [History of the Caliphs of Vardapet Gevond..., 1862, p. 10, 14, 27-28, 30, 112-113; Universal History of Vardan the Great, 1861, pp. 89-90, 95]. In my opinion, the monograph should emphasize that with the formation of the vostikanstvo (viceroyalty) of Arminia (North) in 702, the city of Arminia was founded. The Arab-Khazar wars became more systematic and organized and continued with great ferocity throughout the eighth century. It seems that in this part of the monograph we should speak in more detail about the campaign of Mervan ibn Muhammad in 737, when he demanded auxiliary troops from the rulers of Eastern Georgia, Armenia and Albania. Having recruited an army of 150,000 men, Mervan made a simultaneous invasion of the North Caucasus through the Derbent Pass and the Daryal Gate [Markaryan, 2012-2013, pp. 75-76]. According to Arab sources, Mervan defeated the Khazar armies, they promised to convert to Islam, retreated to the Volga, and the Alans recognized the power of the Arabs. In addition, Mervan brought from this campaign 40 thousand families of captured Khazars, who were settled from Derbent to Shakka, along the Great Caucasian ridge to the Georgian border. All 9 wars of the eighth century between the Arabs and Khazars did not lead to the triumph of either side: the status quo remained in the South Caucasus: the Arabs could not gain a foothold north of Derbent and the Daryal Gorge, and the Khazars did not gain a foothold in the South Caucasus countries, despite repeated devastating invasions (Shapira, 2007, p.329-331).

The mutual weakening of the Arab Caliphate and the Khazar Khaganate during the confrontation in the eighth and first half of the ninth centuries led to the weakening of Arab domination in the South Caucasus region. This was also facilitated by the presence of internal problems in the caliphate: religious separatism, the lack of troops to hold vast territories, and the struggle of noble Arab families for power and influence in the caliphate. Therefore, in Georgia and neighboring countries, the local elite was able to take advantage of the struggle of the Arabs with the Khazars to revive the political structures leading to the country's independence. This also applies to the appearance of the title "erismtavari". Initially, the title in the Kartli region was actually transformed in the eighth century into the title of the sovereign of all Eastern Georgia (pp. 94-95, 117-118, 120, 181-184).

The third chapter of the reviewed monograph analyzes Georgia's relations with the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius and his allies, which was especially clearly manifested in the events of 626-627 during the siege of Tbilisi by the Khazars and Byzantines (pp. 119-141). How big is it

page 199
the importance of this alliance with the Khazars in the struggle against Iran in the South Caucasus and Mesopotamia was attached by the Emperor Heraclius, it becomes clear from the fact of the marriage of the daughter of the Byzantine ruler Evdokia, which took place, according to some scholars, on the eve of the siege of Tbilisi in 626, and according to others after this siege, in 629 [van Esbroeck, 1976, p. 74-96; Cregledy, 1953, s. 319-323; Zuckerman, 1997, p. 113-126]. However, it is not so important that the emperor did not stop for the sake of an alliance with the Khazars to marry a porphyrogenital daughter to a barbarian and a non-Christian, which at that time, according to the imperial socio-political concept, was an extraordinary event. Emperor Heraclius attached great importance to the capture of Tbilisi and all of Georgia, having in mind the creation of a zone of direct direct contact with the Khazar army, which since then has constantly invaded the South Caucasus through the Derbent Pass.

The Georgian chronicle "Kartlis Tskhovreba" and the hagiographic " Martyrdom of David and Constantine "[Martyrdom..., 1982, p. 170; Kartlis Tskhovreba, 1996, p. 189; Biro, 1973, p. 161-168; Lerner, 2003, p. 29-30; Zukerman, 2001, p. 312-333] speak of the great reverence with which Heraclius was held He met with the Georgian nobility, the ruler of the country Stepanoz, and showed a truly Christian worship of the road from Manglisi to Tbilisi, along which St. Nino and other preachers of Christianity came to Georgia (pp. 124-125). This behavior of the Byzantine emperor was caused by respect for the Georgian Orthodox Church. Emperor Heraclius emphasized by his behavior that the war of Byzantium and the Khazar army was directed against Iran and its domination in the South Caucasus, and that the empire was only an ally and friend to the local inhabitants of the Christian faith.

In the fourth chapter of the monograph, questions related to the origin of the rulers of the Abkhazian Kingdom and the role of the Khazars in the foundation and formation of this dynasty are considered. Most of the sources used are Georgian, Byzantine (Greek), Khazar, and Armenian (Gevond). Objecting to K. Tumanov and other authors who believed that the foundation of the Abkhazian Kingdom should be attributed to the first years (beginning)of the Abkhazian Empire. Comparing the events related to the Arab campaigns in Khazaria and the Khazar response in the South Caucasus region, caused by the desire to divert the attention of the Arab Caliphate to Western Georgia and thereby weaken the Arab onslaught to the north (through Derbent), the author of the monograph concludes that the reign of Leon I and the Khazars in the region of the South Caucasus The foundation of the Abkhazian kingdom should be attributed to 740-750 (p. 152, 166-167). G. Alasania thinks that there was only one ruler of this kingdom with the name Leon in the VIII century. The name Leon was, according to the author of the monograph, generic for all the rulers of Abkhazia in the VIII-IX centuries, and the proclamation of Leon as the king of Abkhazia with the help of Byzantium and the Khazars took place in 786 (p.167).

The fifth chapter is devoted to the emergence of Arab rulers in the historical arena and during the functioning of the Tbilisi Emirate. Based on the analysis of the administrative reforms of the Arabs in the Orientalism of Arminiya G. Alasania comes to the conclusion that when in the reign of the Orientalist al-Hasan ibn Qakhtab (754-759), the Tsanar revolt (one of the mountain Georgian tribes) broke out in Eastern Georgia and they called for the help of the Alans and Khazars and through the Daryal Pass and defeated the Arab troops of the governor Caliph al-Mansur (754-775) showed great dissatisfaction and replaced Qahtab with 31 vostikans of the province of Yazid ibn Uzayd (759-768) and divided the vostikanism into four parts. However, the new Vatican also could not hold back the onslaught of the Alan-Khazar army and fled from them. Then the caliph again appointed al-Hasan ibn Qahtab (771-775) as the Vatican, and in these years the Emirate of Tbilisi was separated, and it became completely independent in the middle of the IX century (p.179-180).

In general, these opinions of the author of the monograph are reasonably reasoned by the data of sources. However, the dating of the Jaffarid Arab Emirate from 771 to 1122 is objectionable (p. 180). Emir Jaffar II died in 1046, and the city was then occupied by the Georgian army of King Bagrat IV. The sons of Emir Abu-l-Haj and Mansur fled to the Emir of Ganja Abu-l-Asvar on a raft along the Kura River [Markaryan, 2014, p. 201]. They asked the Seljuks for help in returning the city of Tbilisi to them. The Seljuks captured Tbilisi in 1064, and Sultan Alp-Arslan handed the city over to Emir Abu-l-Aswar Fadlon, ruler of Ganja from the Sheddadite family (Stanley Lan Pul, 2004, p. 252; Bosphorus, 1971, p. 132-133; Lordkipanidze, 1974, p. 83). Thus, after 1046, the Arab dynasty did not rule in Tbilisi, and after the Sheddadites, the city was under the rule of the Seljuks for half a century, from whom King David the Builder recaptured it in 1122.

The sixth chapter deals with the restoration of an independent Georgian State and the participation of the Khazars in this process. It is concluded that this process began in the 760s and intensified in the 790s. However, the role of the Khazars in this process, in my opinion, was indirect, since they only distracted the attention of the Arab Caliphate.

page 200
The seventh chapter of the work is devoted to Georgia's relations with the Kipchaks (Polovtsians). It is known that the king of Georgia David the Builder moved to the country from the North Caucasus either 40 thousand, or 45 thousand. a kibitok. According to some sources, these are families of Polovtsians, and according to others, this is the final number of all immigrants (pp. 254-256). If we take this data as the number of Polovtsian families, it turns out that Tsar David the Builder resettled at least 200-225 thousand people from the steppes of the North Caucasus to Georgia (p.255). Describing the events of the Battle of Didgora in 1121, when King David the Builder defeated the army of a coalition of Muslim emirs led by the ruler of Northern Syria, Emir Il-Ghazi, the Armenian chronicler Matteos Urkhaetsi lists the composition of the Georgian army: "40 thousand Georgian soldiers, 15 thousand Kipchak detachments, 500 Ossetian soldiers and 100 Franks (crusaders)" [Matteos Urkhaetsi Urkhaetsi, 1973, pp. 247, 273-275]. In contrast to this author, the thirteenth-century chronicler Smbat Sparapet estimates the number of Kipchaks at 40,000, Ossetians at 18,000, Armenians at 10,000, and Franks (Crusaders) at 500 (Smbat Sparapet, 1974, p.89). Of course, the report of Smbat Sparapet is doubtful, according to which it turns out that there were no Georgians in the Georgian army in this battle. Here, apparently, you need to refer to the Georgian chronicle "The Life of the King of Kings David", which is an integral part of the official "Kartlis Tskhovreba". This chronicle reports that in the army of Tsar David the Builder there were mostly Georgians, as well as Kipchaks, Ossetians (Alans) and others [Life of the Tsar..., 1992, p. 194].

G. Alasania cites all the data on the Kipchaks (Polovtsians) from various sources and comes to the conclusion that most of the Kipchaks (50 thousand) left Georgia around 1223 and returned to the steppes of the North Caucasus through the Derbent Pass (p. 271), some moved to Shirvan and Shakki, and those remaining in Georgia, apparently, finally assimilated during the XIV-XVI centuries.

Very interesting is the eighth chapter of the work, which analyzes the origin, deeds and transformation of the Bagvashi-Orbeli-Orbeliani clan. It is noted that both Georgian and Armenian chroniclers paid great attention to the history of this family, and Stepanos Orbelian devoted separate works to them (p.274).

The news about the legendary Chinese origin of this dynasty is very similar to the history of the Mamikonian family, which has come down to us in the presentation of Movses Khorenatsi (p. 276). This news of Movses Khorenatsi is usually associated with the reign of Shahanshah Shapur I (240-272), when the closest relatives of the Chinese emperor came to Iran and asked the Shah for shelter and protection from the wrath of the imperial administration. The Shah did not find anything better than to send the entire family of fugitives to Armenia, where they became naharars (large landowners) under the surname Mamikonyan (Movses Khorenatsi, 1990, p. 190). It is noted that I. Marr and N. Adonts associated the origin of this surname with the Georgian southwestern region of Chanet and believed that it had nothing to do with China (the country of Chen-Chin) This legend does not exist (p. 279). V. Minorsky was equally critical of the version about the Chinese origin of both the Orbeli and Mamikonyan families (Minorsky, 1951, pp. 873-874).

G. Alasania refers to the report of the "Armenian Geography" (VII century) about some nomadic tribes-Chens who lived in the steppes of the North Caucasus (p. 280) or in the lower reaches of the Volga, and cites the opinion of the Turkish historian M. F. Kirzioglu, who tries to prove that Stepanos Orbelian allegedly draws "lines of communication with the Turkic world in the origin of this land". dynasties" (p. 281).

G. Alasania does not accept the argument of the Turkish historian M. F. Kirzioglu. It also does not accept the version of the American Caucasian expert K. K. Toumanoff, 1961, p.17-18; idem, 1969, p. 129-130) on the direct connection between the Bagvashi-Orbeli dynasty and the Mamikonyan family. Indeed, K. Tumanov's version does not take into account the fact that the Bagvashi family, according to sources, appeared in Georgia 100 years after the disappearance of the Mamikonyan Naharars dynasty from Armenia after the anti-Arab uprising of 775 [Markaryan, 2004, p. 102; aka, 2014, p. 214], and the Bagvashi-Orbeli family appeared in Georgia in 876.

It is known that the Orbeli family (Orbelyanov) appeared in Armenia after the suppression of the revolt of the Georgian nobility in 1178 by King George III (1156-1184). In 1190, one of the representatives of this family, Ivane Orbeli, returned to Georgia and continued this family in his homeland, and his brother Elikum did not want to return and became the founder of the family of Armenian princes Orbelyanov. The author of the monograph writes that the Orbeli family name in Georgia had branches from which the surnames of the Georgian nobility Kachibadze, Baratashvili, Orbelishvili, Kaplanishvili, Orbelidze, Abashishvili, Kavtarishvili, and Jan-Bakur-Orbeliani were derived (p. 284). Here you can add facts from the history of Armenia. After all, during the XIV-XVI centuries, the Orbeli (Orbelian) family in Vayodzor and Syunik owned a separate principality, until the possessions of this family were confiscated by the Ak-Koyunlu nomadic Turks [Stepanos Orbelian, 1910, p. 374; aka, 1986, p. 304]. The family of the Armenian princes Burtelyan and Dopyan separated from this family.

page 201
G. Alasania refers in the monograph to an inscription from the monastery of Betania dated 1196, according to which Ivane Orbeli had the title "Eristavi" ("the great eristav"), "amirspasalar" and "mandaturthutsi" ("laying on the crown") (p. 290).

We can add to this argument the testimony of Stepanos Orbelian. He reports that rol Orbeli (Bagvashi) in Georgia "had 12 own banners of 1000 people each", held the title of spasalar (commander-in-chief) of the Georgian army, at all feasts in the royal palace Orbeli sat at the silver table above all didebuls (grand dukes), closest to the king and at the coronation of a new king the duties of laying the crown were assigned to representatives of this family (Papazyan, 1958, p. 193-203; aka, 1983, p. 118-125). The wealth of the Bagvashi family is indicated by the fact that the helmet and shield of Liparit the Great (XI century) were decorated with gold-forged patterns, according to the same Stepanos Orbelian.

In conclusion, I would like to note that the new monograph by G. Alasania undoubtedly makes a significant contribution to the history of the medieval period of the history of Georgia and the entire Caucasus region. The paper analyzes the concepts of dozens of different scientists who have studied the history of Georgia. The author of the monograph comes to new and perhaps even somewhat unexpected conclusions on many issues.

The book is written in a clear and accessible language, which does not create difficulties, does not overload the pages with scientific apparatus (notes and footnotes). Although this quality can also be attributed to the advantages of an English translation performed at a very high level.

G. Alasania's work speaks about the continuity and preservation of the traditions of the Georgian historical school, about the author's excellent acquaintance with Georgian sources and the ability to analyze their information in comparison with the sources of other peoples-Armenian, Byzantine (Greek), Arabic and Persian. According to the description, maps of the period and the areas of settlement of nomadic Turkic tribes in the South Caucasus in different periods are suggested at the end of each chapter. It seems that such maps would serve as another argument in support of the author's opinion about the role of nomads in the history of the region.

In conclusion, I consider it necessary to congratulate G. Alasania on the successful completion of a large and complex work and wish her to publish in the future studies on the ethnopolitical processes in the South Caucasus with the participation of the Turkic ethnic element in the period of the XVII-XVIII centuries, when the ethnic configuration of the region began to take on its current shape.

list of literature

Artamonov M. I. Istoriya khazar [History of the Khazars], 2nd Edition, St. Petersburg, 2001.
General history of Stepanos Taronsky, nicknamed Asohik. The writer of the XI century / Translated and edited by N. Emin, Moscow, 1864.

Bosfort K. E. Muslim Dynasties, Moscow, 1971.
Universal History of Vardan the Great / Translated and edited by N. Emin, Moscow, 1861.

Gabashvili V. An obvious attitude to the Turkic tribes and peoples of ancient Georgian sources. Issue III. Tbilisi, 1971 (in Georgian).

The Life of the King of Kings David / Ed., research, edict by M. Shanidze. Tbilisi, 1992 (in Georgian)

History of the East. In 6 volumes, vol. 1 / Edited by V. A. Yakobson, Moscow, 2000.

Istoriya khalifov Vardapet Gevond, pisatelya VIII veka [History of the Caliphs of Vardapet Gevond, a writer of the VIII century].

Kartlis Tskhovreba / Ed. by A. Antelava and N. Shoshiashvili. Tbilisi, 1996 (in Georgian).

Klyapporny S. G. Drevnetyurkskie runicheskie pamyatniki kak istochnik po istorii Srednoi Azii [Ancient Turkic runic monuments as a source on the history of Central Asia]. Moscow, 1964, pp. 44-70.

Klyashtorny S. G. Drevnetyurkskaya pisisnost ' i kul'tura narodov Tsentral'noi Azii (na materialam polevykh issledovaniy v Mongolia, 1968-1969 gg.) [Ancient Turkic writing and Culture of the peoples of Central Asia (based on the materials of field research in Mongolia, 1968-1969)]. 1972. Moscow, 1973. pp. 254-264.

Klyapporny S. G. Terkha inscription (Preliminary publication) / / Soviet Turkology. 1980, N 3. pp. 82-95.

Kryukov M. V. Vostochny Turkestan v III v. B.C. VI v. N.E. Vostochny Turkestan v drevnosti i rannem srednevekovye [Eastern Turkestan in the third century BC and the sixth century AD]. Ed. akad. S. L. Tikhvinsky, B. A. Litvinsky, Moscow, 1988.

Lordkipanidze M. D. Istoriya Pears XI - nachala XIII veka [History of Pears in the XI-early XIII century]. Tbilisi, 1974.

Markaryan S. A. Armenian historian of the 13th century Stepanos Orbelyan o varyagakh-vikingakh Ingvar [About the Vikings of Ingvar]. 2004. N 6. pp. 101-109.

Markaryan S. A. Arab-Khazar wars of the eighth century based on Armenian and Georgian sources. Armenian Journal of Oriental Studies, vol. 44-45. Yerevan, 2012-2013.

Markaryan S. A. Varangians and Vikings in the Caucasus. Yerevan, 2014.

Matteos Urhaetsi. Zhamanakagrutyun (Chronography) / Ed. under the editorship of G. Bartikyan. Yerevan, 1973 (in Armenian).

page 202
Movses Kalankatuatsi. Istoriya strany Aluank [History of the Aluank country] / Translated from drevnearm., vved., znamen. i ukaz. M. V. Smbatyan. Yerevan, 1984.

Movses Khorenatsi. Istoriya Armenii [History of Armenia] / Translated from Ancient Armenian, introduction, note, decree of G. Sarkisyan. Yerevan, 1990.

Martyrdom of David and Constantine / / Gruzinskaya proza, Vol. 1. Tbilisi, 1982 (in Georgian).

Novoseltsev A. P. Rus 'i gosudarstva Kavkaza [Russia and the States of the Caucasus]. Pashuto V. T. Vneshnaya politika Drevnoi Rus' [Foreign Policy of Ancient Russia], Moscow, 1968.

Novoseltsev A. P. Khazar state and its role in the history of Eastern Europe and the Caucasus. Moscow, 1990.

Papazyan A.D. The Beit-ul-man Institute and the confiscation of the lands of Armenian feudal lords in the XV century. Yerevan, 1958. pp. 193-203.

Papazyan A.D. New epigraphic data on the last offspring of the Armenian federal nobility in Syuniks / / IFJ (Patmabanasirakan andes), N 4. Yerevan, 1983, pp. 118-125.

Smbat Sparapet. Taregirk (chronicle) / Translated by drevnearm. A. G. Galstyan. Yerevan, 1974 (in Armenian)

Messages of Khalifa al-Usfuri on the Arab-Khazar wars / Translated from Arabic. and published by V. M. Beilis // The oldest states of Eastern Europe, Moscow, 2000.
Stanley Lan Poole. Muslim Dynasties, Moscow, 2004.
Stepanos Orbelian. History of the country of Sisakan (Syunik). Tiflis, 1910.

Stepanos Orbelian. History of Syunik / Ed. by A. A. Abrahamyan. Yerevan, 1986 (in Armenian).

Zukerman K. Khazary i Vizantiya: pervye kontakty [Khazars and Byzantium: the first contacts]. Simferopol, 2001, pp. 312-333.

Biro M. The Kipchaks in the Georgian Martyrdom of David and Constantine // Annates Universitalis Scientiarum Budapestinensis. Budapest, 1973. P. 161-168.

Czegledy K. Herakleios torok szovetsegesci // Magyar Nyelv. 49. Budapest, 1953. P. 319-323.

Djaparidze G. The Arabic names of the Georgians Georgia // Coll.: Foeign and the Georgians / Ed G. Paichadze. Tbilisi, 1993.

Dunlop D.M. The History of the Jewish Khazars. Princeton - New Jersey, 1954.

Esbroeck van M. Une chronique de Maurice a Heraclius dans une recit sieges de Constantinople // Bedi Kartlisa. 34. P., 1976. P. 74-96.

Lerner K. The chronicle the Conversion of Kartli. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University, 2003.

Minorsky V Caucasian II // Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies. L.: University of London, 1951. Vol. 13. N 4.

Shapira S.V. Dan. Armenian and Georgian sources of the Khazars: A Re-Evaluation // The World of the Kharars. Leiden-Boston: E.J. Brill, 2007. P. 316-331.

Toumanoff C. The Bagratids of Iberia from the eight to the eleventh century // Le Museon. 74. 1961. P. 17-18.

Toumanoff C. The Mamikonids and the Liparitids // Armeniaka. Venice, 1969. P. 125-137.

Zuckerman C. La petite augusta et le Turc. Epiphania-Eudocie sur les monnaies d'Heraclius // Revue Numismarique. 152. 1997. P. 113-126.

page 203

Permanent link to this publication: