AUCASUS AND IRAN
CAUCASUS AND IRAN. The Iranian world is bordered in the northwest by the high mountain barrier of the Caucasus, which separates it from the vast Russian plains beyond. In relief, structure, and ecology the Caucasus constitutes a clear frontier between eastern Europe and western Asia, though it is more closely related to the latter. Located on the peripheries of Persia, Turkey, and Russia, it has been for centuries an arena for political, military, religious, and cultural rivalries and expansionism; the resulting movements have influenced the ethnic composition of the population, which is extremely complex and rich in customs, languages, economic activities, and patterns of land use. Although throughout history the Caucasus has usually been incorporated in political entities belonging to the Iranian world, at the beginning of the 13th/19th century Russia took it, along with the Transcaucasus, from the Qajars (1133-1342/1779-1924), severing those historical ties. Since the establishment of Soviet power on Caucasian territory, relations with Persia have been reduced to an insignificant level.
Physical geography, population, and economy.
Language contact.
(For historical connections between the Caucasus and the Iranian lands see alans; albania; azerraijan; ùarkas; dagestan; georgia; ossetia; etc.)
Physical Geography, Population, and Economy
I. Physical geography.
Relief and structure. The Caucasus range (the Great Caucasus in Russian terminology) is about 1,100 km long, extending from the vicinity of the Taman (or Anapa) peninsula to the Apsheron peninsula, on an axis oriented west-northwest to east-southeast. Its total area is about 145,000 km2, and it is 180 km wide in the region of Mount Elbrus. A dozen or so peaks surpass an elevation of 5,000 m. On its north side the range, which is generally interpreted as an enormous complex of anticlines (Gvozdetski¥ and Mil'kov, pp. 356, 380; Gerasimov, pp. 228-39), rises gradually in a series of parallel chains above the Kuban and Terek plains, which are separated by the Stavropol sill; on the south side it towers over the basins of the Transcaucasia, two opposing triangles that open toward the Black Sea (the Colchian lowlands) and the Caspian Sea (the Kura and Araxes basins) respectively with their apexes meeting in the Surami sill. In addition to this dissymmetry between the northern and southern faces, the range is divided by Mounts Elbrus and Kazbek into three distinct regions on its southern side: the western, central, and eastern Caucasus.
The northern side of the range consists of a series of monoclinal folds, in the form of cuestas, with escarpments facing toward the main chain and the more gradual back slopes fanning out into plateaus of varying sizes, all inclining toward the north at angles of from 5 to 15 degrees. The northernmost ridge, the Neocene cuesta (Lesisty¥, or “forested,” ridge), rises from the alluvial zones of the piedmont. The next (Pastbishchny¥, or “pastoral,” ridge), consisting of Upper Cretaceous limestones, rises to 1,200-1,500 m (the Burgustan and Dzhinal spurs). The highest, the Skalisty¥ (“rocky”) ridge, so-called because of its imposing wall of Lower Cretaceous and Upper Jurassic limestones, reaches an elevation of 3,646 m. It has undergone glaciation in the Quaternary, and its plateaus contain numerous karstic forms. A series of longitudinal depressions has developed along the bases of these cuestas, but only the Jurassic northern depression south of the Skalisty¥ ridge is of significant size. Even there, however, the trough is not continuous, and the component basins are clearly distinct from one another. Each monoclinal fold is steeply cut by the deep gorges of cataclinal rivers (e.g., the Kuban, Baksan, and Terek). In the eastern Caucasus, particularly in Dagestan, the flat lands are much more extensive and part of a more complex structure, in which synclinal plateaus are developing on top of the Jurassic and Cretaceous limestones that dominate the Koysu gorges. Farther upstream the Middle and Upper Jurassic schists have been intensely eroded. The Samur valley and the upper basin of the Koysu constitute a single longitudinal depression.
The backbone of the Caucasian orographic system (Gvozdetski¥ and Mil'kov, p. 380) is composed of principal and lateral chains, which mark the watershed. The principal chain is in the central part of the Caucasian anticlinorium. It consists of horsts of primary crystalline rock (schists and gneiss with granitic intrusions), which rise above 4,000 m. The highest peaks are in the lateral chain; they include the volcanic cones of Mount Elbrus (5,642 m) and Mount Kazbek (5,033 m), which rest on foundations of crystalline and Jurassic rock respectively. It is in this axial zone of the central Caucasus that the most beautiful high-mountain topography is found and that glaciation is most extensive. In the western Caucasus the elevations gradually diminish, and the crystalline foundation disappears under Jurassic, Cretaceous, and Paleocene deposits. Several peaks in the eastern Caucasus rise above 4,000 m (Mount Tebulos Mta 4,493 m, Bazar Dyuzi, 4,466 m, Shakh Dag 4,260 m); although glaciation is minimal in that region, erosion has been particularly severe because of the presence of Jurassic schists.
The steep, narrow southern face of the range, which measures barely 20 km from the crest of the principal chain to the Alazani valley, consists of a series of individual ridges and troughs reflecting repeated longitudinal fractures and displacements toward the south. Along the western section of the mountains, in Abkhazia, an important karstic network has developed among the rectangular folds of the Upper Jurassic and Cretaceous limestones. In the extreme west the range plunges directly into the Black Sea. Farther east the southern slope of the Surami sill is prolonged by the ancient Dzirulo massif, which links it to the mountain system of the Lesser Caucasus, separating the Colchian lowlands from the Kura basin.
Both these lowland areas are deep depressions partly filled by enormous deposits of Tertiary sediment (several kilometers thick) and Pliocene and Quaternary alluvia (up to 700 m thick in the Colchian lowlands; Gvozdetski¥ and Mil'kov, p. 394). Equally large deposits occur in the shallower Kuban and Terek basins flanking the Stavropol sill in Northern Caucasia, where, in the region of Pyatigorsk, the foundation emerges in a series of laccoliths (e.g., Mount Beshtau).
These broad structural assemblages were established in the Miocene and Pliocene (Gerasimov, pp. 234-39), with the formation of the monumental Caucasian anticlinal folds and the basins of the Black and Caspian seas and the concomitant sinking of the Scythian plate and the Transcaucasian basins. These movements have continued in the Quaternary, accompanied by powerful volcanic activity; according to Soviet authors, the present formations, especially the transversal gorges, are mainly the results of tectonic shifts in the Holocene. Recent measurements (Lilienberg) have permitted estimates of the lift during the 20th century; 0-2 mm a year in the northwestern Caucasus, 10-13mm a year in the central and eastern Caucasus, 5-8 mm a year in the extreme southeast. Conversely, the Terek basin is sinking 2-3.5 mm a year. These shifts are accompanied by major seismic activity. Several earthquakes registering higher than 8 on the Richter scale have struck Dagestan in recent decades (1948, 1966, 1970, 1975). Shemakha in Azerbaijan has been destroyed several times. The upper Terek valley and the Kuban plains have also experienced earthquakes of great magnitude in the course of the 20th century.
Climate. The Caucasus is situated on the boundary between the temperate and subtropical climatic zones, and the orientation and height of the range reinforce the contrasts between the two. At sea level the average annual temperatures are approximately 10° C in Northern Caucasia and 16° C in Transcaucasia. The differences are more pronounced in winter, when Northern Caucasia is subject to thermal anticyclones from Russia, bringing average January temperatures of -5° C on the Kuban plains and an absolute minimum of -35° C, whereas in the more sheltered Transcaucasia the January average is 3° C in the west and 6° C in the east, with an absolute minimum close to -20° C on the plains. In summer the temperatures are very similar in all parts of the Caucasus, though slightly higher in the east at noon, owing to more continental location (23-24° C in the west, 25-29° C in the east). Winters are not much more severe in the mountains than on the piedmont because the cold air remains stationary at lower elevations; in the Klukhor pass in the central Caucasus (elevation 2,037 m) average January temperatures range from -8° to 4° C (absolute minimum -31° C; Radvanyi, 1977, pp. 22-28). The summers are hot, averaging 16.5° C at Klukhor in August, with an absolute maximum of 32° C. In July the zero-degree isotherm reaches elevations of 3,700-4,000 m.
In addition, the Caucasus is also the region of translation between humid Atlantic and Mediterranean winds, on one hand, and dry continental air currents, on the other. On the plains the transition occurs on the Stavropol and Surami sills and in the mountains between Mounts Elbrus and Kazbek. West of this line the Kuban depression in the north receives 400-800 mm of precipitation, the mountains more than 1,500mm (up to 4,000 mm on certain peaks), the Colchian lowlands in the south 1,500-2,000mm. To the east of the line it is dry: Less than 1,000 mm of precipitation falls in the mountains, the basins in the interior lowlands of Dagestan are semiarid (250 mm at Botlikh, elev. 1,300 m), and less than 200 mm falls on the Apsheron peninsula. Precipitation comes from the west, in storm systems that are replenished over the waters of the Black Sea, which explains the contrasts between the eastern and western ends of the Caucasus range and also between the well-watered Colchian face and the dryer northern slopes. In the western Caucasus maximum rainfall occurs in winter, in the central and eastern Caucasus in summer. Furthermore, the depth and duration of the snow cover also vary between the western and eastern sections of the range. At an elevation of 1,900 m the western Caucasus receives an average of 1,200 mm of solid precipitation between November and March, compared to only 395 mm at the same elevation in the eastern Caucasus (Kotlyakov and Krenke, p. 248). These figures can vary considerably, however; for example, 10 m of snow fell on the Krestov pass in January 1987. The permanent snow line rises in parallel fashion: from 2,900-3,100 m in the western Caucasus to 3,200-3,500 m in the central Caucasus and 3,600-3,900 m in the eastern Caucasus.
There are 2,047 glaciers in the Caucasus range, covering a total of 1,424 km2. More than half (1,110) are situated in the central Caucasus; they cover an area of 1,033 km2, that is, 72.5 percent of the total glaciated surface in the entire range. There are 565 glaciers in the western Caucasus and 372 in the eastern Caucasus, with surface areas of 278 km2 and 113 km2 respectively. The total volume of ice in the 1980s was estimated at 118.6 km2 (Kotlyakov and Krenke, pp. 246-47). Between 1880 and 1960 it had shrunk about 25 percent, but it appears that now the glaciers are receding more slowly and are even becoming stabilized in certain basins (Kotlyakov and Krenke, p. 261).
The large rivers—the Kuban, Baksan, Terek, Sulak, and Samur on the northern slope and the Inguri, Rioni, Aragvi, and Iori on the southern slope—are fed by the glaciers, and the period of high water thus begins in March, when the snow melts, and lasts into July and August. The greatest volume occurs in summer, when the silt content of the streams is considerable. It is even greater in the east, where there is less vegetation cover: 200 g/m3 in the Kuban, 1,925 g/m3 in the Terek at Ordzhonikidze, 6,570 g/m3 in the Samur at Usukhcha¥ (Radvanyi, 1977, pp. 31-32). These figures attest the strength of the erosion process. In addition, there are frequent sels (mudflows or freshets laden with mud) during prolonged periods of rain and melting snow.
Vegetation and soils. The geographical position of the Caucasus provides favorable conditions for a great range of flora. More than 6,000 species have been enumerated in the region (Zimina and Saint Giron, p. 331). The distribution of flora, which is determined by the terrain and climate, permits identification of several distinct regions, each with its own sequence of zones of elevation.
In the western and central Caucasus the lower forest zone consists of deciduous trees on gray or brown forest soils; oaks (Quercus petraea and Quercus robur on the northern slopes, Quercus iberica in western Georgia and on the Pontic slopes) predominate, along with hornbeams (Carpinus betulus). The zone of transition to piedmont vegetation distinguishes the Kuban regions on the north from the Colchian slopes in the south. In the former these oak and birch forests yield to a wooded steppe, which gradually gives way to the steppe proper, or chernozem. On the other hand, the hornbeams, chestnuts, and oaks of the vestigial Colchian forest, including Castanea sativa, Carpinus caucasica, Celtis caucasica, which shelter a thick undergrowth of perennials (Rhododendron ponticum, Hedera colchica) mingled with several species of liana (Smilax excelsa), predominate up to elevations of 500-600 m, on brownish-yellow or carboniferous soils.
Above 900-1,100m in the western Caucasus there are wide expanses of beech trees (Fagus orientalis) on brown soils, the most common formation in the mountains. On the moist southern slopes they are succeeded above 1,500-1,600 m by a mixed forest of conifers (spruces and pines, Picea orientalis, Abies nordmanniana) and beeches on brown podzolic soils, often succeeded in the upper mountain zone by a forest of dark conifers up to 2,000-2,200 m. In the more arid valleys on the northern slopes beeches and spruces do not appear; instead above the oak trees there is a zone of pine trees, including Pinus silvestris, Pinus sosnowskvi, and Pinus hamata (Grebenshchikov and Ozenda, p. 345). Conversely, on the southern face of the central Caucasus, especially on the north side of the Alazani basin, beeches cover the entire slope up to the limit of the forest zone (Radvanyi, 1977, p. 47), though the upper part of this zone, between 1,800 and 2,500 m, generally consists of a mixture of small deciduous trees (birches, maples, and even beeches).
The lower reaches of the alpine zone (2,000-2,500 m) in the western Caucasus are characterized by tall grasses (Altherbosa), notably Campanula lactiflora and Campanula latifolia, which stand taller than a man, mingled with flowering shrubs (Rhododendron caucasicum; Livret, 1974, pl. 13). These high meadows grow on brownish-gray mountain chernozem (Livret, 1974, p. 40) or spongy peat soils (Gvozdetski¥ and Mil'kov, p. 388). From 2,500 m up to the snow line (3,200 m in the western Caucasus, 3,600 in the central Caucasus) the ground is covered with alpine grasses and wild grains.
In the eastern Caucasus the vegetation is different because of the greater aridity, which is hospitable to mountain xerophytes. In Dagestan the semiarid piedmont steppes, on chestnut or light-chestnut soils, rise to elevations of 500-700 m. Vegetation consists especially of artemisias (Artemisia lercheana, Artemisia taurica). The forests, which have been largely destroyed by lumbering, extend up the outer slopes, where a few oak trees (Quercus petraea) and occasional stands of beeches (Fagus orientalis) survive. On the northern inner slopes of the range there are pines (Pinus sosnowskyi) and birches (Betula raddeana; Radvanyi, 1977, p. 286; Livret, 1982). In the zone between 500-700 m and 2,000-2,500 m the most characteristic formations are the shibliak and mountain steppes. The shibliak is a loose formation of Mediterranean semixerophilous caducifoliate shrubs (on limestone surfaces Rhamnus pallasii, Ephedra procera, and the like, otherwise Paliuris spina-Christi, Lonicera iberica, Berberis vulgaris, and so on). They grow on chestnut soils, usually the products of forest decay. The plateaus are covered by dry mountain steppes on mountain chernozem, which occurs in several variants, with xerophilous graminaceae (Festuca sulcata) and andropogons (Gvozdetski¥ and Mil'kov, p. 390). The alpine zone, from 2,500 to 3,600 m and higher, is equally impoverished in comparison with the western and central Caucasus; it consists entirely of xerophytic meadows (Festuca varia).
On the interior southern slopes the characteristics are comparable to those of the northern slopes, but the forests are more abundant and the shibliak and steppes do not constitute a separate zone.
In order to protect the vegetation and fauna, notably bears and endemic animal species (Capra Severtzovi, Capra cylindrocornus, Prometheomys Schaposhnikovi, Lyrusus mlokosiewiezi, Tatraogallus Caucasicus), about twenty nature preserves have been created in the Caucasus. The oldest, at Lagodekhi, was established in 1912, the two largest (the Caucasus preserve, 266,000 ha, and the Teberda-Arkhyz preserve, 83,400 ha) in 1924 and 1936. In addition, lumbering has been restricted.
Owing to its natural features, the Caucasus exhibits a degree of biogeographical continuity with the northwestern regions of Persia, but its mountainous terrain has served as an important obstacle to population movements between the two areas.
II. Population
The population within the boundaries of the Caucasus range has been estimated at 1.25 million in an area of 103,000 km2 (Thorez, 1983, pp. 661-62), that is, an average density of more than twelve per km2. In fact, a large part of the western Caucasus is almost uninhabited, as are several valleys in the central Caucasus, whereas in the eastern Caucasus the population density is often extremely high: In Dagestan in 1970 it rose along with the altitude up to 1,500 m (below 500 m: 26.8, 500-1,000m: 28.3, 1,000-1,500 m: 42.1, 1,500-2,000 m: 36.0, above 2,000 m: 3.7) and was greater in the mountains than on the plains (Reparaz and Thorez, pp. 103-04). These differences partly reflected natural conditions like the broad expanses of the Dagestan plateaus but even more the history of the 19th and 20th centuries.
The population has experienced and is still experiencing the effects of the Russian conquest of the northern piedmont. For example, after their defeat in 1864 the Circassians were driven from the mountains; this displaced population has been estimated at about half a million (Pokshishevski¥, pp. 514-28). The western Caucasus remains almost entirely uninhabited because no group has come to replace the Circassians. In the central and eastern Caucasus colonization of the piedmont by the Cossacks drove the Caucasians into the mountains. Then, when the Cossacks went to war in 1914, their departure was followed by massive migrations of mountain dwellers into the abandoned stanitsas (Cossack villages; Khristianovich, pp. 61-67).
After the establishment of Soviet power there was an administrative reorganization, based primarily on national and linguistic criteria (Radvanyi, 1985, p. 26). The Caucasus today is thus partitioned among three federated republics (Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic, Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic, Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic), five autonomous republics (Kabardino-Balkarian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, North Ossetian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, Checheno-Ingush Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, Dagestan Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, Abkhazian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic), and three autonomous oblasts (Adygei Autonomous Oblast, Karachayevo-Cherkess Autonomous Oblast, and South Ossetian Autonomous Oblast). All these entities also include territory outside the mountains. Their capitals are located on the piedmont and, except for Tbilisi in Georgia and Baku in Azerbaijan, have long been inhabited mainly by Russians, a circumstance that for a considerable time slowed the exodus of the mountain people, who were hesitant to leave their auls (mountain villages) and settle in a milieu unfamiliar to them (Thorez, 1983, pp. 673-74). Subsequently, however, new villages were founded on the plain and large-scale migrations organized. In the 1920s the populations of twenty-two Karachai villages were transplanted to the plain, 30,000 mountain dwellers from North Ossetia came to settle in fifteen new villages, and 12,000 Chechen families were also involved in these mass migrations. The situation was different in Georgia, where Georgians are the main component of the population, both in the urban centers of the piedmont and in the mountains. The latter was rapidly depopulated to the benefit of the piedmont, where living conditions are much less difficult (Dzhaoshvili, 1968, p. 295). Between 1942 and 1945 many inhabitants of the Caucasus were evacuated or deported; Balkars, Chechens, Ingush, and Karachai even lost their national rights for a time (Wixman, pp. 126-36). Although a number of them returned to their lands after 1956, the population density has never reached its prewar level.
Today the population of the mountains remains almost exclusively rural. The upper limit of permanent habitation is at an elevation of 2,400 m, in the aul of Kurush in Dagestan. Forms of settlement vary with the region. In the damp climate of the western Caucasus no trace of the old wooden villages of the Circassians survives. The fields of the very large agricultural villages on the piedmont, each with several thousand residents, are laid out along the streams in almost continuous strips. At higher elevations they yield to occasional pastoral and forest villages; the higher the elevation the more widely spaced these villages are and the smaller the number of inhabitants. There are no permanent settlements above 1,300 m in this part of the Caucasus. The houses are built of stone and set in gardens, so that they are separated from one another. The region of auls begins east of the Baksan and Kodori rivers. The aul is a village of several dozen to several hundred inhabitants, in which the houses abut each other and the lanes are defined by dry stone or mud-brick walls. Depending on the terrain, the house may adjoin the stable or sheepfold or be placed above it. The traditional rooftop terraces are gradually being replaced by tiled roofs, and new houses are proliferating on the outskirts. This type of village, which is particularly characteristic of Dagestan, also occurs in the central Caucasus, where the houses are larger and often roofed with flat stones. The celebrated towers of Svanetia, used as granaries and places of refuge, are attached to houses consisting of single rooms shared by humans and animals; they are now classified as historic monuments.
New constructions are more homogeneous throughout the Caucasus, despite the variety of materials used in different regions (e.g., dry stone or mud brick). They are cubical in farm, with a ground floor of tamped earth or concrete, which serves for threshing and stabling. The second story, usually reached by an outside staircase, is reserved for living quarters. It is divided into several rooms and surrounded by a balcony or porch. The roof, often covered with metal sheets, but sometimes with flat tiles, is two-paneled in the north central Caucasus and four-paneled on the southern slopes and in the entire eastern Caucasus.
The predominantly rural character of the Caucasian population partly accounts for the high natural growth rate in the eastern Caucasus, though it is declining. Despite the exodus to the piedmont, which was accelerated in the 1960s, the mountain population continued to grow until the beginning of the 1980s, at least in Dagestan and Azerbaijan. Fertility is still high in those regions, in contrast to the western and central Caucasus, where the population has aged and the birth rate declined as a result of the exodus. In those parts of the mountains the most isolated villages are seasonally depopulated, and many are eventually totally abandoned. Beside the traditional migrations associated with transhumance, new forms of temporary migration have appeared; many of those who have left the villages to work in the cities return in the summertime to help with the haying, and young men who have been hired for Siberian work crews come home after several months or even two or three years. In some instances the abandonment of villages is accelerated by natural catastrophes. The exceptionally heavy snowfalls and floods in the Georgian Caucasus during the winter of 1986-87 caused the departure of 2,800 families—about a third of the inhabitants—from Svanetia (Dzhaoshvili, 1988, p. 64).
There are also a few larger towns scattered in the mountains. Most often they are characterized by single economic activities (e.g., extractive industries at Tyrny Auz, Sadon, and Chiatura; tourism at Teberda; hot springs at Tskhaltubo). Small urban centers located in proximity to the mountains, like Karachayevsk, Kuba, Shemakha, Ambrolauri, Tsageri, and Oni, have more diversified functions, notably commercial, administrative, and service.
III. Economy
For reasons of geography (e.g. peripheral location within the U.S.S.R. and constraints of the physical environment), history (e.g., relatively late conquest by the Russians), and ethnic composition (e.g., the presence of many national minorities), the Caucasus, especially its eastern regions, remained far a long time and, despite recent efforts, still remains poorly integrated into the Soviet economy and has been only slightly affected by the changes that have transformed the latter (Durbiano et al., p. 118). Income in the mountains is lower than on the plains; in Georgia individual productivity in the mountains is two or three times lower than the average for the republic as a whole (Kobakhidzhe, p. 58). Economic and social structures have been modified on the same pattern as in the rest of the country, though sometimes only rather late; for example, collectivization of the land did not begin in Svanetia until 1940. Nevertheless, the systems of production have changed little in the mountains, and the Caucasus is still primarily characterized by an agricultural and pastoral mountain economy. More than half the working population is employed in the agricultural sector (Mekhraliev and Salmanov, p. 107).
Production is organized within a tripartite framework, consisting of kolkhozes (collective farms), sovkhozes (state farms), and the auxiliary domestic sector. Each collective farm encompasses several villages. In the central and eastern Caucasus, where transhumance is common, there are cultivated lands near the auls, high summer pastures on the axial chain of the mountain range, and winter pastures and irrigated cultivation on the piedmont (in particular, the Kizlyar and Shirvan steppes). The private sector has for a long lime been limited to parcels of land of 0.25-0.50 ha for personal use and flocks of twenty to fifty sheep. Since 1982 such private endeavor has been encouraged, however, and since 1985 new forms of relationship between the collective and private sectors have been developed, with the introduction of family contracts and the allotment of land, livestock, and means of production to the contractors.
The specific nature of agricultural activities is determined by the zone of elevation, and there are also differences between the western Caucasus, where cattle raising predominates, and the rest of the range, where sheep and goats are the main livestock. Cattle breeding plays an essential economic role, accounting for 40-90% of the income of the mountain people. Cattle raising in the more humid west requires seasonal shifts between villages and summer farms. To improve the milk yield of the small native breeds, which produce only 1,200-2,000 liters a year per cow, crossbreeding has been introduced, and artificial insemination is becoming common. On the other hand, milking barns have been constructed near villages to limit the necessity for moving lactating cows. In the central and eastern Caucasus flocks of several thousand head of sheep and goats are herded in a pattern of inverse transhumance over hundreds of kilometers, sometimes through several republics. The animals are sheared twice a year, when they return to the villages before and after the alpine pasturing. The simple rustic (tushinski¥ “grazing”) Caucasian species yield modest amounts of wool and meat, but they are very sturdy and inexpensive to raise. As for sheep's milk, commercial production has only begun.
In the high mountains a much smaller proportion of the land is cultivated; thus, in the mountainous region of Dagestan, crops occupy only 5.4 percent of land for agriculture, hay meadows 15.3 percent, and pastures for flocks 77.9 percent (Durbiano et al., p. 115). In the high valleys crops, mainly a few potatoes, are grown only on the private plots. At medium elevations they are more important, and the total area devoted to them is increasing as specialized crops are introduced or expanded, at least in the eastern Caucasus (Thorez, 1987, pp. 356-60). In addition to cereals (rye and corn), which are grown on the plateaus or, in Dagestan, on slopes divided into strips and terraces, such forage crops as beets have been developed; in the valleys of the eastern Caucasus legumes, fruit trees (e.g., apricots and pears), and grapes are grown on irrigated plots. Private farmers are beginning to install small fences, and slowly mountain agriculture is being transformed.
The industrial sector is dependent on local resources and agricultural products, a sign of underindustrialization. There is a rich handicraft tradition in the eastern Caucasus (See carpets xv. caucasian carpets). The goldsmiths and silversmiths of Kubachi and the weavers of Khuchni and Akhty have been celebrated for centuries, and their work is well known outside the Caucasus. In the Soviet period masters and journeymen have formed craft cooperatives, and this sector, which has been able to maintain a high level of production owing to the Soviet market, has remained vital to the present day. Few industries have been established in the mountains; the primary exceptions are mining (for wolfram and molybdenum at Tyrny Auz, manganese at Chiatura, and polymetallic minerals at Ardon) and quarrying. In the populated eastern region, where the work force is underemployed, small factories (e.g., for preserves and clothing) are beginning to be established.
Industrialization is hampered, however, by inadequate infrastructure, though all the permanently inhabited villages have now been electrified. At first small hydroelectric plants or groups of generators were used, but gradually the distribution grid has been extended. The piedmonts are supplied by large dams and powerful hydroelectric plants, for example, the plant at Chirke¥ (800 mw) on the Sulak river, which powers several large factories in the valley (Durbiano and Nicod, p. 128), and those at Zhinvali on the Aragvi river and at Dzhvari (1,640 mw) on the Inguri river (Gruzinskaya, p. 122). In the high mountains, on the other hand, where power plants must occupy arable land, the necessary equipment was installed only rather late, for technical reasons arising particularly from the frequency of earthquakes. There are no good roads in the Caucasus. The main axial roads bypass it, and it can be crossed only by the Georgian military road through the Krestov pass or by the Mamison pass. The transverse valleys in the north (e.g., those of the Kuban and Baksan rivers) are accessible, but many villages can be reached only by stony roads. Construction of paved roads was speeded up after 1975, and a Transcaucasian railroad is already under construction between Tbilisi and Ordzhonikidze via the Aragvi and Terek valleys.
The difficulties of travel have also slowed the development of tourism, for which the Caucasus is otherwise well suited. Certain regions (like Svanetia and the interior of Dagestan) are blessed with architectural riches and many picturesque villages, virtual open-air museums (Dzhaoshvili, p. 62). Although springs are abundant, they are still only partially exploited as thermal spas. The largest resorts (e.g., Kislovodsk) are outside the mountains or on their periphery (Radvanyi and Thorez, pp. 187-91). Excursions into the mountains are organized from these and other large resorts on the Black Sea coast (Sochi, Gagra), but available lodgings are insufficient to accommodate many such groups. Since the 1970s winter-sports resorts have been established at Teberda-Dombay, Tse¥, and Gudauri. Because of growing urbanization on the piedmonts an increasing number of people have second homes in the mountains, often original family homes that have been preserved after migration to the lowlands.
In the depopulated areas of the Caucasus the primary problem today is how to support the remaining population and increase tourist activities. In the eastern Caucasus ways must he found to diversify the economy and introduce new activities that will mobilize an underemployed population.
Bibliography : C. Durbiano and J. Nicod, “Ame‚nagements hydrauliques dans le Caucase oriental et en Crime‚e,” Me‚diterrane‚e 2-3, 1987, pp. 125-32. C. Durbiano, J. Radvanyi, and O. Kibalchich, “Les transformations contemporaines de l'e‚conomie des montagnes de Crime‚e et du Caucase oriental, comparison avec les Alpes du sud,” Me‚diterrane‚e 2-3, 1987, pp. 111-23. V. S. Dzhaoshvili, Naselenie Gruzii, Tbilisi, 1968. Idem, “Puti osvoeniya resursov gornykh territori¥ SSSR,” Izvestiya AN SSSR, Geographic series 2, 1988, pp. 56-65. I. P. Gerasimov, “Structure ge‚ologique et relief du Caucase,” Revue de ge‚ographie alpine 69/2, 1981, pp. 225-39. O. S. Grebenshchikov and P. Ozenda, “Principaux traits de ressemblance et de diffe‚rence de la couverture ve‚ge‚tale,” Revue de ge‚ographie alpine 69/2, 1981, pp. 333-51. O. S. Grebenshchikov et al., “Les e‚cosysteàmes naturels et leur e‚tagement dans le Caucase,” Revue de ge‚ographie alpine 62/2, 1974, pp. 169-90. A. A. Grossgheim, Rastitel'ny¥ pokrov Kavkaza, Moscow, 1948. Gruzinskaya sovetskaya entsiklopediya, Tbilisi, 1981. N. A. Gvozdetski¥ and F. N. Mil'kov, Fizicheskaya geografriya SSSR, Moscow, 1976. Kavkaz, Moscow, 1966. V. P. Khristianovich, Gornaya Ingushiya, Rostov, 1928. E. D. Kobakhidzhe, Sotsial'no-ekonomicheskie i ekonomicheskie problemy gornykh ra¥onov Kavkaza, Tbilisi, 1985. V. M. Kotlyakov and A. N. Krenke, “Glaciation actuelle et climat du Caucase,” Revue de ge‚ographie alpine 69/2, 1981, pp. 241-64. V. I. Kozlov, Natsional'nosti SSSR, Moscow, 1965. G. M. Lappo and V. S. Dzhaoshvili, “Le peuplement dans le Caucase oriental. Formes traditionelles et actuelles,” Me‚diterrane‚e 2-3, 1987, pp. 85-93. D. A. Lilienberg, “Particularite‚s morphostructurales du Caucase oriental et du Daghestan,” in Livret guide Caucase orientale 1982, Moscow, 1982. Livret guide Caucase 1974, Tbilisi, 1974. Livret guide Caucase oriental 1982, Moscow, 1982. E. K. Mekhraliev and A. A. Salmanov, “Nekotorie problemy zanyatosti naseleniya i rekreatsionnogo khozya¥stva gornykh ra¥onov Azerba¥dzhansko¥ SSR,” Izvestiva AN AzSSR, Nauki o Zemle series 6, Baku, pp. 105-10. A. A. Mints et al., Geografiya khozya¥stva respublik Zakavkaz'ya, Moscow, 1966. V. V. Pokshishevski¥, “Geography of the Prerevolutionary Colonization and Migration Processes in the North Caucasus,” Soviet Geography, September 1984, pp. 514-28. J. Radvanyi, L'influence de l'homme sur la ve‚ge‚tation du Caucase, Paris, 1977. Idem, “Milieux naturels et occupation du sol dans le Caucase oriental," Bulletin de l'Association de ge‚ographes français 456-57, 1978, pp. 281-91. Idem, Re‚gion et pouvoir en URSS, Paris, 1985. Idem and P. Thorez, “Le tourisme dans le Caucase,” Annales de ge‚ographie 468, 1976, pp. 178-205. A. de Reparaz and P. Thorez, “La population et le peuplement dans le Caucase oriental et dans les Alpes du sud, formes traditionnelles, formes contemporaines, diffe‚renciations re‚gionales,” Me‚diterrane‚e 2-3, 1987, pp. 95-110. P. Thorez, “Population et peuplement dans le Grand Caucase,” Annales de ge‚ographie 514, 1983, pp. 660-90. Idem, “L'ame‚nagement de l'espace et l'occupation de la population dans le Caucase oriental,” Bulletin de la Socie‚te‚ languedocienne de ge‚ographie 3-4, 1987, pp. 345-62. S. A. Vodovozov, Problemy razvitiya i razmeshcheniya proizvoditel'nykh sil Severnogo Kavkaza, Moscow, 1975. R. Wixman, Language Aspects of Ethnic Patterns and Process in the North Caucasus, Chicago, 1980. R. P. Zimina and M. C. Saint Giron, “Bioge‚ographie compare‚e des Alpes et du Caucase,” Revue de ge‚ographie alpine 69/2, 1981, pp. 329-32.
(Pierre Thorez)
Language Contact
Languages of the Caucasus. The linguistic map of the Caucasus is extremely variegated. The following language families are represented:
1. Caucasian (or Ibero-Caucasian) languages is the designation of those languages of the area that do not belong to any other known family of languages. They fall into four distinct groups: a) the Kartvelian or South Caucasian languages: Georgian, Svan, and Mingrelian (mainly spoken in the Georgian S.S.R.), and Laz (mostly spoken in Turkey). b) The Northwest Caucasian languages: Abkhaz (in the Karachai-Cherkes A.O., R.S.F.S.R.), Adyge (West Circassian, in the Adyge A. O., R.S.F.S.R.), Kabardian (East Circassian, in the Kabard-Balkar A.S.S.R., R.S.F.S.R.), and Ubykh (in Turkey, now all but extinct). c) The North-central Caucasian (Nakh) languages: Ingush and Chechen (in Chechen-Ingush A.S.S.R., R.S.F.S.R.) and Bats (in the Georgian S.S.R). d) The Northeast (Dagestanian) languages: Avar, the various Andi, Dido, Lak-Dargva, and Lezgian languages (Dagestanian A.S.S.R., R.S.F.S.R., and the Azerbaijanian S.S.R.). Some scholars include the Nakh languages in the Northeast Caucasian group. Otherwise the genetic affinities between the four groups are uncertain.
2. Turkic languages: a) Azeri (in the Azerbaijanian S.S.R and in northwestern Iran). b) Anatolian Turkish (in a few communities in Transcaucasia). c) Kumyk (mainly in Dagestanian A.S.S.R.). d) Nogay (in various places in north Caucasus). e) Karachai-Balkar (in the Karachai-Balkar A.S.S.R. and the Kabard-Balkar A.S.S.R.).
3. Indo-European languages: a) Armenian (mainly in the Armenian S.S.R., but also in the Georgian and Azerbaijanian S.S.R. and in various countries outside the Soviet Union). b) Greek (in the Georgian S.S.R. and in north Caucasus). c) Slavonic languages (Russian, Ukrainian, mainly in north Caucasus; Russian is also used as an administrative language all over the area, in part beside the indigenous languages). d) Various Iranian languages (see below).
The only Caucasian language with an old literary tradition is Georgian (texts since a.d. the 5th century); in some of the other languages literatures have arisen in modern times, mainly after the establishment of Soviet power. Today twelve of the Caucasian languages have status of literary languages: Georgian, Abkhaz, Abaza, Adyge, Kabard-Cherkes, Chechen, Ingush, Avar, Lak, Dargva, Lezgi, Tabasaran.
Christian literature in Caucasian Albanian (possibly a Lezgian language still surviving as Udi in northern Azerbaijan) is known to have existed in late Antiquity; it became extinct in the Middle Ages (Mnacakanjan; Schulze).
The Armenian literature dates back to a.d. the 5th century. The Greek and Slavic groups have no indigenous literature. For Iranian languages, see below. (For general surveys see Comrie and Hewitt; Deeters; Faensen; Yazyki narodov SSSR.)
Iranian Languages in the Caucasus. The following Iranian languages are spoken in the Caucasus and Transcaucasia (see Oranskij, Schmitt, in addition to the works referred to above): Kurdish (Kurmanji), in the Soviet republics of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia (ca. 75,000 speakers); Tati in southern Dagestan and northern Azerbaijan (ca. 10,000); T®a@leÞi in Azerbaijan (ca. 10,000); and Ossetic (ca. 480,000) in the northern Caucasus and Georgia (South Ossetia; figures taken from the Soviet census of 1979, except that for Táa@leÞi speakers, which is from 1959; see Faensen, pp. 103-04). Bilingualism (or multilingualism) is widespread, even the rule, in all these language communities. In Soviet Azerbaijan the majority of the Tati- and T®a@leÞi-speaking populations also speak Azeri Turkish, which is the language of instruction and administration, and claim ethnic identification with Azeris; the census figures for these two languages may thus be too low. T®a@leÞi is also spoken in Iranian Azerbaijan. Both Kurdish and Ossetic are written languages, with rich literatures. See also individual articles on Azeri (azerbaijan viii), Kurdish, Ossetic, Tati, and T®a@leÞi, and cf. azerbaijan vii.
Kurdish. The Georgian Kurds, who live for the most part in the region of Tbilisi, are immigrants from Armenia, whereas the Kurds of Azerbaijan mainly occupy the territory along the Armenian border. The language of these communities is almost identical with that of the Armenian Kurds (see Bakaev, 1973, 1977).
Tati. Tati belongs to the group of so-called Southwest Iranian languages and is closely related to Persian (for bibliography see Oranskij, II) and should not be confused with the Tati dialects spoken in Azerbaijan, Zanja@n and Qazv^n and which belong to the Northwest Iranian (see E. Yarshater, A Grammar of Southern Tati Dialects, The Hague and Paris, 1969). It is spoken by two main groups, one Jewish (Russ. gorskie evrei, mountain Jews), the other Muslim; there is also a small group of Christian Tati-speakers in Armenia. According to tradition, speakers of Tati are descended from military colonists of southwestern Iran who were settled in southern Dagestan in the Sasanian period (Yazyki narodov SSSR I, p. 281 ). For the Jews of this region Tati is also a literary language. Tati has drawn heavily upon the vocabulary of Azeri, the predominant language of the region. Even postpositions, conjunctions, and particles and derivational suffixes (e.g., -lik, -ly‚k, -lug, -lïq, primarily used to form abstract nouns; -±i, denoting practitioner of a profession (Gryunberg, 1963, p. 19) have been borrowed. Numerous Arabic words, especially those relating to Islam, have also been adopted, partly through Azeri. Other borrowings include Persian words, either directly or through Azeri; modern Russian loanwords, usually in their Azeri form; and numerous words from the Northeast Caucasian (Lezgian) languages of southern Dagestan. Syntactic loans in the form of calques are frequent, but, despite the strong influence exerted by Azeri, Tati grammar remains predominantly Iranian. Azeri influence on the sound system manifests itself especially clearly in a tendency to introduce vowel harmony (Gryunberg, 1963, p. 11; in Yazyki narodov SSSR I, pp. 281-301; Oranskij, I, pp. 163-69; Sokolova, pp. 122-47).
T®a@leÞi. T®a@leÞi belongs to the group of so-called Northwest Iranian languages, which prevailed throughout Azerbaijan from antiquity to the later Middle Ages. Like Tati, T®a@leÞi has borrowed extensively from Azeri. Paired Azeri and indigenous synonyms are common. Azeri suffixes like -lik (-li, -luk) and -±i are found in derivations of T®a@leÞi words. Azeri participles in -miÞ are used to form compound verbs (allatmiÞ karde “to deceive,” ke±miÞ be “to forgive”). In the 1930s an attempt was made to introduce a written form of T®a@leÞi, but it was soon abandoned. (See Miller, in Yazyki narodov SSSR I, pp. 302-22; Sokolova, I, pp. 104-21.)
Ossetic. Ossetic is spoken in a comparatively small area in the central Caucasus flanked on all sides by Caucasian and Turkic-speaking areas. On the east it is bordered by the Nakh languages (Ingush, Chechen), on the west by Kabardian (Circassian) and Balkar (Turkic). In South Ossetia the bulk of the Ossetic population is bilingual in Ossetic and Georgian. Since the middle of the 18th century Russian has gradually spread through the northern Caucasus and must now be considered the predominant language of the area. There is evidence, however, that Ossetic (or its ancestor language, Alania, see alans) formerly had much greater currency, especially in the northwestern Caucasus, where in the Middle Ages it seems to have been a language of status. Iranian (Scythian, Sarmatian) languages have been spoken in southern Russia and the Ponto-Caspian steppes since at least as early as the first half of the 1st millennium b.c. It has even been maintained that the Scythians and Sarmatians may have been indigenous to those areas, the descendants of Aryan tribes who remained in their ancient habitat when the majority of their sister tribes migrated to the east and south (Abaev, 1965; Jettmar, pp. 62-64). Iranian cultural influence in the northern Caucasus was also apparently strong in former times. The epic cycle of the Narts, current in many parts of the northern Caucasus and in various languages, seems to be largely of Iranian origin (see Dume‚zil, tr., and 1968, pp. 441-575; Abaev, 1945; Narti¯ kaddzµit¯ä). The former spread of Ossetic (Alanic) is borne out by numerous place names in territories now occupied by Circassian (Kabardian) tribes: river names in -dan = Oss. don “water, river,” names of gorges or ravines in -kam = Oss. kom “mouth, gorge,” and so on. In these territories Ossetic has gradually been ousted by Turkic- and, in particular, Circassian-speaking tribes, who in the late Middle Ages began to spread north and east from the coasts of the Black Sea (Abaev, 1949, passim, and 1987; Gaglo¥ti; Kaloev; Istoriya Severo-osetinsko¥ ASSR I; see also ùarkas). In the 16th and 17th centuries the feudal lords of Kabarda had hegemony over the northern Caucasus, and their language was predominant (Istoriya Severo-osentinsko¥ ASSR I, pp. 104-19). A number of lexical affinities between Ossetic and Circassian-Kabardian attest the close relations between the speakers of these languages (Abaev, 1949, I, p. 88 and passim; Thordarson, in Schmitt, ed.). Mutual borrowings have also taken place between Ossetic and Abkhas, Mingrelian, and Svan (Abaev, 1949, I, passim); today these language areas are separated from the Ossetic area by Turkic- and Circassian-speaking populations. On the other hand, there is some evidence that Ossetic is now spoken in territory that was formerly occupied by Nakh tribes: The oldest strata of the southern Ossetic-speaking population are descended from immigrants from the north who settled in the Java district around the upper reaches of the Didi Liaxvi river in the late Middle Ages or early modern times (Ocherki istorii I).
Today there are two chief dialects of Ossetic, Digor (West Ossetic) and Iron (East Ossetic). South Ossetic is a local variant of Iron but has been more strongly exposed than North Ossetic to lexical influence from Georgian (Abaev, 1949, I, pp. 494-506; Tedevi, 1983); plant names and other lexemes referring to local conditions in Transcaucasia are largely of Georgian origin (Tekhov, pp. 110-22 and passim). A number of lexical affinities that connect Digor and Kabardian are not shared by Iron. The population of the Ordzhonikidze area (eastern Ossetia) is partly bilingual in a Nakh dialect (Ingush) and Iron, which has resulted in a good deal of mutual lexical borrowing. Among Ossetic words that seem to have been adopted from Nakh at an early date are bäx “horse” (attested in the so-called “Yass word list,” written in Hungary in the 15th century but deriving from an Alanic colony established there in the 13th century; see Ne‚meth, 1959; Thordarson, in Schmitt, ed.) and läg “man” (a probable reading of the Alanic inscription from the Zelenchuk river, 11th-12th century; see Zgusta, 1987); the words for “hand,” “foot,” and “mouth” (I. k÷ux/D. k÷ox; k÷ax; I. dzix/D. dzux; ç÷ux respectively), which have ousted the older words arm, fad, kom, may also have been borrowed from Nakh. All these words are common to both dialects.
Since Khazar times (a.d. 6th century) there have been language contacts between Ossetic (Alanic) and various Turkic tribes. The influence exerted by the Turkic languages upon Ossetic seems to have been much more profound than that of the Caucasian languages, at least as far as vocabulary is concerned. Turkic languages have apparently acted as intermediaries between Ossetic and Uralic and Altaic languages in southern Russia and Central Asia; quite a number of plant names seem to be migratory words that have entered the Caucasus from the north (see Tekhov). In the Zelenchuk inscription at least one Turkic proper name is attested (pakathar [in Greek script] = Bäqätar < Turk. *ba©atur, cf. OTurk. batur, Mong. bagatur “hero,” which in various forms is used as a proper name all over the Caucasus). Today Ossetic shares numerous proper names of Turkic derivation with neighboring Caucasian languages. In modern Ossetic (I.) Asi¯/(D.) As(s)i, the ancient ethnic name of the Alans, is applied to the Balkars, a Turkic tribe occupying former Alanic territory (see asii).
Among the structural features of Ossetic that seem to reflect the influence of Caucasian or Turkic languages spoken in the area before the advent of the Ossetes (substratum) and later in neighboring areas (adstratum) are the following: 1. Phonology. The introduction of unvoiced glottal stops and affricates: p÷, t÷, c÷ (±÷, in Iron only), k÷, and an unvoiced uvular stop: q (in Digor only in loanwords) is no doubt attributable to bilingual contacts. The same is true of the prosodic pattern (with word accent subordinate to syntagmatic accent), in which Ossetic seems to accord with Nakh and Georgian. 2. Morphology and syntax. In contrast to other Iranian languages Ossetic has developed a comparatively complex case system (nine cases in Iron, eight cases in Digor). Nothing quite parallel is found in neighboring languages, however, though there is some similarity to the case system of Nakh. On the other hand, the agglutinative character of the declensions (with the same case endings for singular and plural, in the latter with plural marker -t-) is of Iranian origin and has parallels in Sogdian and Yaghnobi. It also seems natural to attribute the vigesimal system of counting to the influence of neighboring languages. An important structural innovation is the gerund in -gæ ( < *-aka@, the instrumental of a verbal noun in *-aka-), the use of which has parallels in neighboring Caucasian and Turkic languages. Subordination is, however, mainly achieved by means of conjunctions and finite clauses. Another innovation that is clearly attributable to influence from Caucasian languages is the two-dimensional system of local preverbs, in which both the direction of the action and the position of the observer are indicated: Ir. a-ci¯d “he went out (away from the observer)” versus ra-ci¯d “he came out (toward the observer),” etc. An analogous system is found in Georgian. There are also many loan translations and semantic and phraseological calques.
It should be stressed, however, that in many semantic, phraseological, and lexical similarities between Ossetic and one or more of the neighboring languages the direction of borrowing cannot be determined. Even when some influence is admitted as an explanation of typological change, it is difficult to establish with certainty which is the source language. (See Abaev 1949, I, passim; for other works by Abaev on the same subject see Isaev.)
Despite long-standing bilingual relations with various adjacent languages Ossetic has in fact been remarkably conservative and has largely retained the character of an “Eastern” Middle Iranian language, especially in the morphology and syntax of verbs (see, e.g., the relevant chapters in Schmitt, ed.). In lexical composition it also exhibits striking tenacity, most of the core vocabulary being of Iranian origin (see Bielmeier). Lexical borrowing is usually linked to geographical and cultural peculiarities of the Caucasus, that is, the word has been borrowed together with its referent.
Iranian influence on Caucasian languages. There is general agreement that Iranian languages predominated in Azerbaijan from the 1st millennium b.c. until the advent of the Turks in a.d. the 11th century (see Menges, pp. 41-42; Camb. Hist. Iran IV, pp. 226-28, and VI, pp. 950-52). The process of Turkicization was essentially complete by the beginning of the 16th century, and today Iranian languages are spoken in only a few scattered settlements in the area. Their social and cultural prestige is low, and in a few generations they will probably have become extinct. It is likely that Northeast Caucasian languages were formerly spoken much farther south and west than they are today and that they have shared the fate of the Iranian idioms of the area. Today Udi, which may be descended from the language of ancient Caucasian Albania (q.v. ), is spoken in only two villages in northern Soviet Azerbaijan and one small village in eastern Georgia (Schulze, pp. 281-93), which suggests that there may have been contact between Northwest Iranian and Northeast Caucasian (Dagestanian) languages in prehistoric times. Modern ignorance of these languages and their exact relations with later recorded languages hampers investigation of this question, however. Political and cultural influence from the Iranian empires was already apparent in Transcaucasia in pre-Christian times. Iranian loanwords may have entered Georgian (q.v.) as early as the Median period (Andronik'aÞvili, pp. 11-40). During the Parthian and Sasanian periods Iranian proper name were fashionable among the aristocracy of Albania and eastern Georgia (Andronik'aÞvili, chap. 3). Iranian influence was at its height under the Sasanians, when Mazdaism was the religion of the Iberian upper classes (Wesendonk). From inscriptions found at Armazi, in eastern Georgia it appears, however, that Aramaic, the lingua franca of the Near East, was used as a chancery language in the first centuries after Christ (bibliography in Gignoux, p. 44). Iranian (Parthian, Middle Persian) loanwords are found in the earliest Georgian texts (late 5th century), partly borrowed via Armenian; among them are a number of Zoroastrian terms: eÞma, eÞmak÷i “devil,” cf. Av. ae@Þma- “rage” (q.v.; a demon), jojoxeti “hell,” (cf. Av. dao`ahva- “hell,” Pahl. duÞox “hell,” Arm. d`ox-k¿ [plur. form]). In most instances lexical borrowings are linked with political, economic, and cultural relations between Iranians and Georgians and do not reflect direct bilingual contact. (See Andronik'aÞvili.)
Caucasian languages in Iran. In Iran today Georgian is spoken in a few settlements in the county (Þahresta@n) of Far^dan (Georgian Pereidnelebi) by descendants of prisoners of war transported by Shah ¿Abba@s at the beginning of the 17th century (Ùikobava; GigineiÞvili et al., pp. 251-68, texts and bibliography). The language of these settlements is only imperfectly known. The influence of Persian on the vocabulary seems to have been strong, whereas the grammatical structure has largely retained its Georgian character. Although Shah ¿Abba@s also transferred a large number of Georgians to various other places in Iran (Khorasan, Ma@zandera@n, G^la@n, Fa@rs), they were absorbed into the surrounding populations and lost their language. Colonies of “Circassians” (i.e., northwestern Caucasians) were also founded in Fa@rs, but nothing precise is known about their nationality or language (cf. Oberling).
Bibliography : V. I. Abaev, Nartovski¥ eàpos, Izvestiya Severo-osetinskogo nauchno-issledovatel'skogo instituta 10/1, Dzhaudzhikau, 1945. Idem, Osetinski¥ yazyk i fol'klor I, Moscow and Leningrad, 1949. Idem, Istoriko-eàtimologicheski¥ slovar' osetinskogo yazyka I-III, Moscow and Leningrad, 1958-79. Idem, Skifo-evrope¥skie izoglossy, Moscow, 1965. Idem, “Skifo-sarmatskie narechiya,” in Osnovy iranskogo yazykoznaniya I: Drevneiranskie yazyki, Moscow, 1987. M. Andronik'aÞvili, Nark'vevebi iranul-kartuli enobrivi urtiertobidan (Studies in Iranian-Georgian linguistic contacts) I, Tbilisi, 1966. Ch. Kh. Bakaev, Yazyk Kurdov SSSR, Moscow, 1973. Idem, Rol' yazykovykh kontaktov v razvitii yazyka Kurdov SSSR, Moscow, 1977. R. Bielmeier, Historische Untersuchung zum Erb- und Lehnwortschatzanteil im ossetischen Grundwortschatz, Europäische Hochschulschriften, ser. XXVII, vol. 2, Frankfurt, etc., 1977. A. Ùikobava, “Pereidnulis mtavari taviseburebani” (The main peculiarities of the Georgian language of Far^dan), in T'pilisis universit'et'is moambe (Bulletin of the University of Tbilisi) 7, 1927, pp. 196-247 (contains texts and a glossary). B. Comrie and B. G. Hewitt, The Languages of the Soviet Union, Cambridge Language Surveys, Cambridge, 1981 , chaps. 2, 4, 5. G. Deeters, “Die kaukasischen Sprachen,” in HO I/VII: Armenisch und Kaukasisch, Leiden and Cologne, 1963. G. Dume‚zil, Mythe et e‚pope‚e I, Paris, 1968. Idem, tr., Le livre des he‚ros. Le‚gendes sur les Nartes, Paris, 1965. N. G. Dzhuso¥ty, Istoriya osetinsko¥ literatury, Tbilisi, II, pp. 99-207. J. Faensen, Sprachen in der USSR, Osnabrück, 1983 (location of languages and numbers of speakers). Y. S. Gaglo¥ti, Alany i voprosy eàtnogeneza osetin, Tbilisi, 1966. I. GigineiÞvili et al., Kartuli dialekt'ologia I, Tbilisi, pp. 251-68 (texts and bibliography). Ph. Gignoux, Glossaire des inscriptions pehlevies et parthes, Corpus Inscr. Iran., Suppl. Ser. I, London, 1972. A. L. Gryunberg, Yazyk severoazerba¥dzhanskikh Tatov, Leningrad, 1963. W. B. Henning, “The Ancient Language of Azerbaijan,” TPS, 1954, pp. 157-77 (repr. in idem, Selected Papers II, Acta Iranica 15, Tehran and Liege, 1977, pp. 457-77). M. I. Isaev, Vaso Abaev. K 80-letiyu so dnya rozhdeniya, Ordzhonikidze, 1980, pp. 134-43 (bibliography of Abaev's works). Istoriya Severo-osetinsko¥ ASSR I, Moscow, 1959. K. Jettmar, “Mittelasien und Sibirien in vortürkischer Zeit,” in HO I/V, V: Geschichte Mittelasiens, Leiden and Cologne, 1966. B. A. Kaloev, Osetiny. Istoriko-eàtnograficheskoe issledovanie, Moscow, 1967. K. H. Menges, The Turkic Languages and Peoples. An Introduction to Turkic Studies, Ural-altaische Bibliothek 15, Wiesbaden, 1968. B. V. Miller, Talyshski¥ yazyk, Moscow, 1953. A. Sh. Mnacakanyan, O literature kavkazko¥ Albanii, Yerevan, 1969. J. Ne‚meth, Eine Wörterliste der Jassen, der ungarländischen Alanen, Abh. der Deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Kl. für Sprachen, Literatur und Kunst, 1958, no. 4, Berlin, 1959. P. Oberling, “Georgians and Circassians in Iran,” Studia Caucasica (The Hague) 1, 1963, pp. 127-43. Ocherki istorii Yugo-osetinsko¥ avtonommo¥ oblasti I, Tbilisi, 1985. I. M. Oranski¥, Die neuiranischen Sprachen der Sowjetunion, The Hague and Paris, 1975, I, pp. 129-72, II, bibliography. Z. ˆaraÞenije, Pereidneli “Gurjebi” (The Georgians of Far^dan), Tbilisi, 1979 (with texts). R. Schmitt, ed., Compendium Linguarum Iranicarum, Wiesbaden, 1989. W. Schulze, Die Sprache der Uden in Nord-Azerbajd`an. Studien zur Synchronie und Diachronie einer süd-ostkaukasischen Sprache, Wiesbaden, 1982. V. S. Sokolova, Ocherki po fonetike iranskikh yazykov I, Moscow and Leningrad, 1953. O. Tedevi, Nark'vevebi kartul-osuri enobrivi urtiertobidan (Studies in Georgian-Ossetic linguistic contacts), Tbilisi, 1983. O. G. von Wesendonk, “Über georgisches Heidentum,” Caucasica 1, Leipzig, 1924, pp. 1-102. E. Yarshater, A Grammar of Southern Tati Dialects, The Hague and Paris, 1969. Idem, in EIr. III/3, pp. 238-45. Yazyki narodov SSSR I, II, IV, Moscow, 1966-67. L. Zgusta, The Old Ossetic Inscription from the River Zelen±uk, Sb. der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 468, Veröffentlichungen der Iranischen Kommission 21, Vienna, 1987.
(Fridrik Thordarson)
Figure 5. Relief map of the Caucasus (after Kavkaz 1966)
Figure 6. Map of the Caucasus