The Making of the Georgian Nation

Fascinating book!

A well-researched and informational book. This positive assessment is further justified by the premier academic journal in political science, the American Political Science Review, which called the book a 'tour de force research.' My only critique is that the book should have dedicated more towards the partisan structure of Georgia during the Soviet and post-Soviet period.

One of the worst nonfiction books I've read. The author glosses over much of Georgia's history for maybe the first half of the book, which only gets to the beginning of the 19th century. The remainder of the book is wasted on entirely too much detail about the political movements, while nearly skipping major global events. Both World Wars are hardly discussed at all! Instead, the author decides to include details about percentages of crop growths and town population composition, all the while ignoring important events that occurred.This book was an absolute waste of time and money. I'm only two chapters into Donald Rayfield's "Edge of Empires" and already it's better than Suny's turd of a book, which isn't saying much.Save your money for better texts elsewhere.

Much like the title implies, this is book looks at how the concept of the Georgian people was developed throughout history. Suny argues that it is largely in opposition to occupying forces that the Georgians truly created their national identity, and presents a solid case of such. Modern Georgia has been overrun by nearly every nearby force, and yet the Georgians were never removed from the region, instead thriving in it. Even non-military actions, like the economic dominance of ethnic Armenians in Tbilisi for most of its history, is shown to have played a large role, one that give the Georgians a drive to control their own destiny, and not be led by Armenians.Their own perception only increased in the years after the Russian annexation, in part due to the wider spread of nationalism throughout Europe, and an increased effort by the Russian authorities to assimilate the Georgians into a more Russian identity. Further efforts by the Soviet Union led to similar results, with the brief independence of the Georgian Democratic Republic serving as a hope for the succeeding Soviet era and occupation.The book is limited in that it was impossible for Suny to gain access to the Soviet archives at the time, and with no update after the initial breakup of the Soviet Union (the second edition does touch on the wars Georgia fought, but is unable to properly give them a proper treatment), it is unable to give a full overview. It must also be seen for what it is: the book is not a history of Georgia, but instead a history of how the Georgian people came to exist, and how the idea of what it means to be Georgian has changed. It is thus a very valuable book, and a premier work on Georgia in English.

I felt motivated to write this review because the number of low scores from critics with an agenda. Readers new to the subject must understand that the always-turbulent history of the Caucasus makes for acrimonious debates and intensely-politicized historiography where the most basic facts are routinely challenged. Richard Grigor Suny, a highly respected authority on questions of national identity in the post-Soviet space, cuts through all this mess with a frank and evenhanded anaylsis. The first portion of the book is straight-up narrative history, much of which material that few nonspecialists come across, yet it is laid out plainly and conveniently for any interested reader. The rest traces the roots and rise of Georgian national consciousness in modern times, always accounting for the complexities of an ethnically diverse scene and Russia's commanding influence. It is a book that will satisfy few ideologues seeking to fight historical battles over again, but I highly recommend it to anyone who has been ensnared by this unique region of the world and is looking for so more in-depth reading and a genuine education in the subject. I later found myself constantly referring back to my memories of Suny's book while studying nationalism more broadly in an academic setting.

Suny is a renowned, respected and responsible scholar. He is a third generation American of Armenian descent, but this has nothing to do with some small-minded reviewers' paranoia about "Armenian propaganda". Even some of his Armenia-related books, such as "Looking Toward Ararat: Armenia in Modern History", are not wholeheartedly accepted in Armenia proper, because local scholars tend to consider Suny's views as being utterly Americanized and therefore to some extent detached from the Armenian reality. Readers need to understand that in a multi-ethnic society, such as Georgian, there will inevitably be people representing Georgian majority as well as non-Georgian minorities, who will exhibit distress and disappointment with this or that passage or chapter in the book. Readers should also be aware that the U.S.-based Association on the Study of Nationalities has included this book in the series of best publications on nationalities inhabiting the Eurasian landmass.For those who are anxious about an Armenian-American having written a book on Georgia, I, for one, would be interested in reading an alternative perspective by one of your own scholars who published a similar book in the U.S. Who could you recommend?

Ronald Suny presents the story of how the Georgia Republic became an independent nation. I worked for two years in Georgia and this book helped me understand Georgians, their pride in their culture and long history and their antipathy to Russia.Suny writes well --the book reads like a novel even though it is carefully researched.

As other reviewers noted, book is not an objective account of Georgian history

Much like the title implies, this is book looks at how the concept of the Georgian people was developed throughout history. Suny argues that it is largely in opposition to occupying forces that the Georgians truly created their national identity, and presents a solid case of such. Modern Georgia has been overrun by nearly every nearby force, and yet the Georgians were never removed from the region, instead thriving in it. Even non-military actions, like the economic dominance of ethnic Armenians in Tbilisi for most of its history, is shown to have played a large role, one that give the Georgians a drive to control their own destiny, and not be led by Armenians.Their own perception only increased in the years after the Russian annexation, in part due to the wider spread of nationalism throughout Europe, and an increased effort by the Russian authorities to assimilate the Georgians into a more Russian identity. Further efforts by the Soviet Union led to similar results, with the brief independence of the Georgian Democratic Republic serving as a hope for the succeeding Soviet era and occupation.The book is limited in that it was impossible for Suny to gain access to the Soviet archives at the time, and with no update after the initial breakup of the Soviet Union (the second edition does touch on the wars Georgia fought, but is unable to properly give them a proper treatment), it is unable to give a full overview. It must also be seen for what it is: the book is not a history of Georgia, but instead a history of how the Georgian people came to exist, and how the idea of what it means to be Georgian has changed. It is thus a very valuable book, and a premier work on Georgia in English.