Tengiz
Simashvili
Forgotten
History: The Circumstances Surrounding the Creation of the Monument to King
Erekle II in Telavi
(1950s–1970s)
Published in: Proceedings of the
Faculty of Humanities and the Institute of Georgian History, Ivane
Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Vol. XXI, Tbilisi, 2025.
The monument to King Erekle II (Heraclius II),
which stands in the city of Telavi, was created during the Soviet period. Its
author is the renowned sculptor Merab Merabishvili. The monument to Erekle II,
produced by Merabishvili in the early 1970s, was ceremonially unveiled on 24
April 1971. However, the history preceding the erection of the monument to
Erekle II, which has become a symbol of Telavi, remains unknown to many people
in Georgia, including the residents of Telavi themselves. As the materials we
have discovered reveal, the question of erecting a monument to Erekle II in
Telavi had already arisen in the 1950s.
In the Kakheti Regional Archive, we discovered
the personal archival collection of Giorgi Jashiashvili, who served as Chairman
of the Telavi Executive Committee in the 1950s. The collection contains Giorgi
Jashiashvili’s previously unpublished memoirs and materials of various kinds.
Among them is a several-page memoir entitled “For the Monument to Erekle”,
which recounts the circumstances surrounding the attempt to erect a monument to
Erekle II in Telavi in the late 1950s. [Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal
Collection of Giorgi Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, pp. 17–42.]
According to Giorgi Jashiashvili, until the
mid-1950s, not even a street named after Erekle II existed in Telavi during the
Soviet period. Furthermore, the area surrounding Batonis Tsikhe (the Palace
Fortress), located in the city centre, was poorly maintained. According to G.
Jashiashvili, numerous structures stood near the western gate of Batonis
Tsikhe, some of them built directly against the fortress walls. In his words:
“In front of the ceremonial entrance to the
Kremlin [G. Jashiashvili uses this term to refer to the so-called Batonis
Tsikhe – T.S.] stood a number of shacks. Before Sovietisation, there was a
large horse stable belonging to some Armenian merchant, who used it to keep his
horses. After Sovietisation, the premises were confiscated from their owner and
converted first into a shop and later into a cinema.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection
of Giorgi Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 17.]
In 1954, construction began on a new cinema
building near the western gate of Batonis Tsikhe. It was commissioned on 7
November 1958. [Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 18.] According to G. Jashiashvili:
“This made it possible to remove the barns and
stables located in front of the Kremlin. Their removal was carried out through
a concerted effort, with the broad participation of the entire patriotic
population of the town. A considerable part of this historic site had been
allocated to Armenian merchants as a cemetery. Who sold it to them? This is a
very interesting question, as is how they came into possession of it. But the
worthless Georgian feudal lords were willing to sell even the palace, provided
they received money. Matters had reached such a point that the area at the foot
of the Kremlin towers was filled with latrines built by merchants, as a result
of which these bastion towers had sustained considerable damage. All these
unsightly remnants were removed and demolished. The western area in front of
the cleared and cleaned Kremlin was then redeveloped according to a unified
plan along its entire length, under my supervision as an engineer.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection
of Giorgi Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 18.] (See Document 3.)
It is noteworthy that on 9 April 1958, by a
decision of the Executive Committee of the Telavi Workers’ Deputies’ Council,
this cleared area near the western gate of Batonis Tsikhe was named Erekle
II Square. [Telavi Historical Museum, Giorgi Jashiashvili Archive,
Materials Concerning the Erection of the Monument to Erekle II, 1958–1959, Fund
No. 11872, File 5. (See Document 2.)]
During the same period, the road descending
eastwards from Batonis Tsikhe was named Erekle II Street, while the
garden situated along the southern wall of Batonis Tsikhe was named Erekle
II Garden. [Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, pp. 17–18.]
Giorgi Jashiashvili does not explain what
prompted the Soviet authorities, in the second half of the 1950s, to
rehabilitate the name of King Erekle II so rapidly. Giorgi Melitauri, a
well-known educator and public figure from Telavi who held various positions
during the Soviet period, repeatedly emphasised the negative attitude of Soviet
officials at the time towards Erekle II. In his still-unpublished memoirs, he
states that in 1927 several rooms of Erekle II’s palace, including the room in
which the king was born and died, were transferred to the Telavi Museum. G.
Melitauri writes that when the museum staff showed this room to the Chairman of
the Executive Committee:
“The Chairman of the Executive Committee
became furious: ‘How dare you hang a portrait of Erekle II in this room? Take
it down and burn it immediately! That is all we need now – portraits of kings
hanging on the walls!’ It was useless to argue that this was an exhibit
depicting a great military commander rather than a king; he simply refused to
listen.”
The museum staff subsequently removed the
portrait, painted by the artist Bregadze, and sent it to the Georgian Museum.
[Telavi Historical Museum, Giorgi Melitauri Archive, “A So-called Chronicle”
(Telavi District, 1918–1948), Fund No. 34, pp. 1–2.]
We have also been unable to establish how the
idea of erecting a monument to Erekle II emerged at that particular time. It is
known that during the Soviet period, the celebration of anniversaries
commemorating particular historical figures generally took place on the basis
of directives issued by the central authorities. For example, in 1957, as part
of the commemorative events marking the anniversary of Ilia Chavchavadze, a
hill in Telavi known as Gigo’s Hill was renamed Ilia’s Hill by a
decision of the Telavi Executive Committee, apparently following instructions
received “from above”. During the Soviet period, residents of the Telavi
District had been executed by shooting at this location. [Kakheti Regional
Archive, Executive Committee of the Telavi Workers’ Deputies’ Council, Minutes
No. 25, 8 October 1957, p. 27; newspaper Alaznis Gant'iadi, 25 October
1957.]
In 1958, the Telavi Executive Committee
adopted a resolution concerning the erection of a monument to Ilia
Chavchavadze, a great Georgian writer and public figure. The resolution
stipulated:
“A monument to Ilia Chavchavadze shall be
erected in the city of Telavi, in the eastern part of Erekle II Garden.”
[Telavi Historical Museum, Giorgi Jashiashvili
Archive, Materials Concerning the Erection of the Monument to Erekle II,
1958–1959, Fund No. 11872, Notebook 6, p. 2.]
As for the reasons behind the emergence of the
idea of erecting a monument to Erekle II in the 1950s, we cannot link it to any
particular anniversary. It is possible that some directive had indeed been
issued “from above”; however, we have been unable to find any documentary
evidence to support this assumption. The materials we have discovered relate
directly to the attempt to implement the project of erecting a monument to
Erekle II in Telavi in the late 1950s.
The Kakheti Regional Archive and the
collections of the Telavi Museum preserve the aforementioned personal archival
collection of Giorgi Jashiashvili, who served as Chairman of the Executive
Committee of the Telavi City Council from 1952 to 1961. The collection contains
documents relating to the proposed erection of the monument to Erekle II,
various notes, the author’s memoirs, and other materials.
In his still-unpublished memoirs, Giorgi
Jashiashvili notes that in the second half of the 1950s, the Telavi Executive
Committee undertook a number of measures to commemorate Erekle II. Nevertheless,
it failed to resolve the question of erecting a monument to the king. According
to Jashiashvili, the local authorities approached sculptors living in Tbilisi
in the hope that one of them would undertake to create a monument to Erekle II.
However, the sculptors demanded a substantial advance payment, which the Telavi
Executive Committee was unable to afford at the time. [Kakheti Regional
Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p.
18.]
It appears that news of the intention to erect
a monument to King Erekle II spread rapidly throughout Telavi. Some residents
welcomed the idea, but, according to Jashiashvili, certain groups of people,
mainly elderly residents, expressed their dissatisfaction:
“What do we need a monument to Erekle for? He
settled Armenians here, allowed the Russians to enter permanently, and
Russified the country.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection
of Giorgi Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 19.]
Nevertheless, the majority of the population
expressed their willingness to contribute to the project:
“Just start building the monument, and we will
contribute part of the money. Cast it in bronze – we will collect copper
cauldrons and help in that way, too.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection
of Giorgi Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 19.]
According to Giorgi Jashiashvili, encouraged by the support
expressed by the local population, he began searching for sculptors outside
Georgia. In his words:
“Some time passed. Then, one fine day in 1956, an article
appeared in the newspaper Zarya Vostoka, in which a Russian author
wrote that a Georgian military engineer and architect named Giorgi Kevkhishvili
was working in Moscow and was also an outstanding sculptor.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 19.]
On the basis of this information, it may be assumed that
the idea of erecting a monument to Erekle II emerged sometime between 1952 and
1955, since Giorgi Jashiashvili was appointed Chairman of the Telavi Executive
Committee in 1952.
It appears that Giorgi Jashiashvili knew this individual
personally. He and Giorgi Kevkhishvili, who was born in the village of Kalauri
in Gurjaani District, had studied at the Industrial Institute in Tbilisi during
the same period. [Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, pp. 19–22.]
An interesting detail emerges from Jashiashvili’s account.
He writes:
“Giorgi Kevkhishvili possessed an innate natural ability to
locate underground water and determine its depth using a forked stick. This was
a remarkable human talent. It was precisely this ability that he used at the
front, where he searched for water in areas without water supplies and ensured
that military units were supplied with water through the engineering corps.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 20.]
Giorgi Jashiashvili contacted Giorgi Kevkhishvili and
proposed that he undertake the creation of a monument to Erekle II. The
archival materials preserve letters sent by Giorgi Jashiashvili to
Kevkhishvili, as well as Kevkhishvili’s replies. These documents shed light on
the circumstances surrounding the proposed creation of the monument to Erekle
II.
Jashiashvili wrote to him:
“If there is still some Georgian patriotism left in you,
then put it to work and prepare a sketch and model for the creation of a
monument to Erekle II... I will send you photographs of the site where it is to
be erected.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 20.]
In his memoirs, Giorgi Jashiashvili expressed regret,
accompanied by a degree of self-irony:
“I promised him all sorts of things – even the construction
of towers – although I had nothing in my hands. Deep down, however, I knew that
I had no supporters who would stand behind me, and that is precisely how things
turned out.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 20.]
Giorgi Kevkhishvili accepted the proposal and requested
several portraits of Erekle II, as well as photographs of a man with a similar
physique to the king, mounted on a Georgian horse. A suitable horse and rider
were found in Giorgi Jashiashvili’s native village of Vardisubani. Photographs
were taken and, together with other materials, sent to Giorgi Kevkhishvili in
Moscow. As Jashiashvili writes:
“Unlike the sculptors in Tbilisi, he did not demand
anything from me. ‘It will be difficult for me, but one day my work will be
appreciated, and that will be my reward’ – that is what he wrote.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 21.]
It appears that Giorgi Kevkhishvili was not satisfied with
the photographs he had received. While in Moscow, he consulted library
materials containing the memoirs of contemporaries who had personally known
Erekle II. In addition, he maintained regular correspondence with Giorgi
Jashiashvili.
In a subsequent letter dated 2 April 1958, Giorgi
Kevkhishvili wrote to Jashiashvili:
“You are absolutely right about the hat. To be frank, I do
not like the idea of depicting him wearing a turban either. As you know, the
Georgian Cultural Decade is currently taking place in Moscow. The Marjanishvili
State Theatre has staged King Erekle here; you have probably seen the
production. I attended the performance. Even in the play, the form of the
turban has been changed. As I have been able to ascertain, the theatre, too,
did not wish to portray his personality with a turban. I spoke to a
photographer who had been specially invited to take photographs and asked him
to photograph actor Godziashvili, who was playing the role of King Erekle.
Using these photographs, I will try to find an appropriate design for his
headwear.”
[Telavi Historical Museum, Giorgi Jashiashvili Archive,
Materials Concerning the Erection of the Monument to Erekle II, 1958–1959, Fund
No. 11872, Notebook 6, p. 12.]
On the basis of the information he had gathered in this
way, Giorgi Kevkhishvili developed an understanding of Erekle II’s “physical
appearance, spiritual resilience, strength, and habits, all of which would
subsequently prove useful to the sculptor in his work.” [Kakheti Regional
Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p.
21.]
On 21 April 1958, Giorgi Kevkhishvili sent another letter
to Giorgi Jashiashvili, informing him that he had approached two sculptors who
had agreed to participate in the creation of the monument to Erekle II. [Telavi
Historical Museum, Giorgi Jashiashvili Archive, Materials Concerning the
Erection of the Monument to Erekle II, 1958–1959, Fund No. 11872, Notebook 6,
p. 8.]
It emerges that two sculptors working in Moscow, V. N.
Kerensky and I. K. Kotov, had expressed their willingness to prepare a design
for the monument to Erekle II. Having familiarised themselves with the
available materials, they “began preparing sketches in the sculpture workshop
of the Ministry of Defence.” [Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of
Giorgi Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 21.] According to Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Giorgi Kevkhishvili was at that time the head of the
aforementioned workshop. [Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of
Giorgi Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 28.]
According to Giorgi Jashiashvili:
“Work on the models began in 1957. The entire undertaking
was kept quiet; otherwise, I thought, the sculptors from Tbilisi would
certainly have sabotaged it.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 21.]
It should also be noted that sculptors based in Moscow were
actively promoting their own projects at the time. In a letter dated 25
February 1958, Giorgi Kevkhishvili wrote the following to Giorgi Jashiashvili:
“They are waiting for a new resolution to be issued. Under
its provisions, a competition will have to be announced for the implementation
of all such projects, and the construction of the monument will be commissioned
to whoever wins. The problem is that the local people here are primarily
interested in obtaining substantial financial rewards. For this reason, they
will do everything possible to ensure that their own project is selected, even
if our project is superior.”
[Telavi Historical Museum, Giorgi Jashiashvili Archive,
Materials Concerning the Erection of the Monument to Erekle II, 1958–1959, Fund
No. 11872, Notebook 6, p. 8.]
On 21 April 1958, Giorgi Kevkhishvili wrote to Giorgi
Jashiashvili:
“By the middle of May, we will have completed the sketches
for the monument... I will inform you by telegram or letter as soon as the
sketches are finished.”
[Telavi Historical Museum, Giorgi Jashiashvili Archive,
Materials Concerning the Erection of the Monument to Erekle II, 1958–1959, Fund
No. 11872, Notebook 6, p. 8.]
We believe that presenting a relatively detailed account of
the history of the proposed erection of the monument to Erekle II is of
particular interest to readers because the archival materials we have
discovered also provide valuable insight into the attitudes of Soviet officials
towards initiatives of this kind at the time.
For example, as Giorgi Jashiashvili writes, it was only
after the sculptors based in Moscow had begun preparing the models for the
monument that he informed the leadership of Telavi District about the project.
At one of their meetings, Giorgi Jashiashvili addressed them as follows:
“The residents of the town, particularly the younger
generation, and even people from Tbilisi, constantly reproach us, asking why we
have not erected a monument to Erekle. Yet nobody was willing to undertake this
major project without an advance payment. Everyone demanded money in advance
just to prepare a sketch. Bilanashvili asked for twenty thousand roubles in
advance, and the others made similar demands. Now I have found a man here, a
local man who studied here and grew up here, and I intend to ask him to
undertake this important task. I provided him with the newspaper Zarya
Vostoka, in which his name was mentioned, as well as his letters... Nobody
even bothered to look at that newspaper. Geldiashvili said he did not have time
for such things. Asatashvili told me: ‘It seems you have nothing more important
to do at the Executive Committee than chase after such matters. You would be
better off attending to the town's streets.’ Before God, it must be said that
Batiashvili and Rostomashvili did not say a word.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, pp. 21–22.]
Jashiashvili further remarks:
“In fact, they were absolutely right. What would the
erection of a monument to Erekle have meant for them? What glory would it have
brought them?... A month later, Geldiashvili became Secretary of the Presidium
of the Supreme Soviet of Georgia, Asatashvili took his place, and Batiashvili
became Chairman. Now that was what mattered to them – their positions and
prospects. What Erekle? As the saying goes...”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 22.]
It should be emphasised that, in this particular instance,
our account is based on Giorgi Jashiashvili’s memoirs. Consequently, his assessments
of the aforementioned officials who headed the Telavi District at the time are,
naturally, subjective. Nevertheless, such attitudes towards initiatives of this
kind among representatives of the Soviet authorities were, to a certain extent,
characteristic of the Soviet system of that period. It was a time when any
initiative undertaken by a local official that proved unacceptable to the
central authorities could cost that individual not only their career but also
their personal freedom. – T.S.
Despite the negative attitude of representatives of the
local authorities in Telavi District, Giorgi Jashiashvili wrote to Giorgi
Kevkhishvili, instructing him to continue work on the models for the monument
to Erekle II.
On 12 July 1958, during the summer, the sculptors Giorgi
Kevkhishvili and Vasili Kerensky arrived in Georgia with four completed models
of the monument to Erekle II. Two of the models had been produced by Giorgi
Kevkhishvili, while the other two belonged to Kerensky and Kotov.
The four proposed models of the monument to Erekle II were
described as follows:
First model: Erekle II depicted in a
battle-ready position, seated on a Georgian horse, without a helmet or hat,
with his sword drawn and raised.
(See Document 1.)
Second model: Erekle II seated on a large
horse, wearing a turban-style hat, holding a sword in one hand and extending
the Treaty of Georgievsk towards the north with the other.
Third model: The horse standing on three
legs, raising its fourth leg as if striking an enemy's torso. Erekle is
depicted without a hat, with the hand holding the Treaty of Georgievsk extended
towards the north.
Fourth model: Erekle once again wearing a
turban-style headdress, depicted in a ceremonial pose, holding a sword and the
treaty.
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 25.]
An exhibition and public viewing of these models of the
monument to Erekle II was apparently organised in Telavi between 16 and 21 July
1958, on the stage of the assembly hall of the local House of Culture at the
time. The public exhibition of the models lasted five days. Visitors were
invited to record their opinions and impressions in a visitors' comment book.
On the fifth day of the exhibition, a public discussion was
organised in the hall of the Telavi House of Culture. Although no official
advance announcement had been made about the discussion of the different
versions of the models, the hall was filled with people. Jashiashvili writes:
“Representatives of patriotic families living in Telavi
gathered here. People from all professions expressed their opinions about the
models.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, pp. 25–26.]
The sculptors Giorgi Kevkhishvili and Vasili Kerensky
addressed the gathering. More than ten members of the audience also took the
floor and expressed their views. [Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection
of Giorgi Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 26.]
The residents of Telavi expressed their profound gratitude
to the sculptors, particularly after learning that they had worked on the
models without receiving any payment. One of the speakers remarked:
“Kevkhishvili grew up here; he is a Kakhetian and a
Georgian, and he worked without demanding payment. This Russian sculptor showed
us greater respect by undertaking to create a model of a Georgian warrior-hero,
whereas none of our own sculptors was willing to do so without payment, as some
Georgian sculptors had demonstrated.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 26.]
As can be established from the visitors' comments and the
opinions expressed by those who spoke at the meeting, the majority of Telavi
residents preferred the first model of the monument to Erekle II. It depicted
the king seated on a Georgian horse, without a helmet or hat, in a battle-ready
position, with his sword drawn and raised. The author of this model was the
sculptor Giorgi Kevkhishvili.
During the discussion of the models, Kevkhishvili was asked
the following question:
“Why is Erekle depicted with his sword-bearing arm
extended, bareheaded in battle, and wearing a royal mantle?”
He explained his artistic concept as follows:
“I took one episode from his military campaigns and made it
the basis of my composition. It depicts the moment when, during a battle, the
infidels infiltrated their spies into the army and spread rumours that Erekle
had been killed and that his body had been carried away. ‘Why continue
fighting?’ they were saying. In this way, they sought to create confusion and
disorder within the army. Needless to say, there were also traitors among the
spies. The army was experiencing difficulties in battle, and the king was
trying to discover the reason. Eventually, he found it: the troops captured a
spy who had been spreading rumours about his death. In that situation, the king
removed his armour, put on his ceremonial mantle, and stood with his sword in
his hand, bareheaded. When the army saw that the reports of his death were
false, the soldiers became enraged, charged at the enemy, and inflicted a
crushing defeat upon them.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, pp. 26–27.]
In the visitors' comment books preserved in the collections
of the Telavi Museum, containing impressions recorded during the public viewing
of the models of the monument to Erekle II – two substantial hardcover
notebooks – we find the following entries:
“On behalf of the youth of Telavi, we demand that a
monument be erected in our beautiful city, where Erekle II was born and to
whose prosperity he devoted his determination and benevolent spirit, dedicating
himself to the well-being of Georgia. The monument should convey the full
strength of Patara Kakhi in battle.”
– Tamarashvili, V. Gharibiani, F. Kapanadze, N.
Asatashvili, J. Jangulashvili, N. Vakashashvili.
“In our opinion, it would be desirable to erect a monument
depicting King Erekle in battle in the Old Garden.”
– M. Gharibashvili.
“In my personal opinion, it would be desirable to erect a
monument depicting Erekle in battle in the Old Garden.”
– L. Kakulia. [Lamara Kakulia, Principal of Telavi
Secondary School No. 4.]
“It would be good to erect a monument to Erekle II
depicting him in battle.”
– B. Balarjishvili. [Baadur Balarjishvili, writer, poet and
screenwriter from Telavi; author of the screenplay for the film Khareba and
Gogia.]
“King Erekle spent his entire life, from the age of fifteen
onwards, fighting in battles, and never once sheathed his sword. Therefore, he
must unquestionably be depicted at the very moment of battle – either with his
sword drawn, or, alternatively, with his sword raised and poised to strike.”
– V. Paatashvili. [Vano Paatashvili, public figure and
publicist from Telavi.]
[Telavi Historical Museum, Giorgi Jashiashvili Archive,
Materials Concerning the Erection of the Monument to Erekle II, 1958–1959, Fund
No. 11872, Impressions Notebook 1.]
The engineer from Telavi, V. Baliashvili, wrote:
“In the opinion of both my daughter and myself, it would be
desirable to erect a monument depicting Erekle in battle.”
According to M. Darchiashvili, K. Lomidze, M. Zaridze and
T. Shiukashvili, teachers at Telavi Secondary School No. 3:
“It would be preferable for the monument to the great
Erekle to depict him at the moment of battle. At the same time, it is essential
to take into consideration that Erekle must be wearing a helmet while
fighting.”
The same issue was emphasised in an entry made by Medea
Mezvrishvili [Chairwoman of the Telavi District Executive Committee in the
1970s], Joni Jijეishvili [lecturer at Telavi University, 1970–2000], and Otar
Khutsishvili [Second Secretary of the Telavi District Komsomol Committee,
1957–1959]:
“In our opinion, it would be desirable to erect the
monument to Erekle in Freedom Square, depicting him at the moment of battle,
without a turban. It would be good if the sculptor took one observation into
consideration: Georgians did not go into battle bareheaded. Therefore, Erekle
should wear a helmet rather than a turban, which is characteristic of the
East.”
[Telavi Historical Museum, Giorgi Jashiashvili Archive,
Materials Concerning the Erection of the Monument to Erekle II, 1958–1959, Fund
No. 11872, Impressions Notebook 2.] (See Document 5.)
Other entries in the visitors' comment books also clearly
demonstrate that an overwhelming majority of the local population favoured
Giorgi Kevkhishvili's model of the monument. Following the conclusion of the
exhibition, the models of the monument, together with copies of the opinions
recorded by visitors in the comment books, were sent to Moscow. [Kakheti
Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491,
File 8, p. 26.]
The models of the monument to Erekle II were subsequently
exhibited for a certain period at an artists' exhibition hall in Moscow, where
they attracted a considerable number of visitors. [Kakheti Regional Archive,
Personal Collection of Giorgi Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 27.]
As for the sculptors Giorgi Kevkhishvili and Vasili
Kerensky, they were taken on visits to Alaverdi, Shuamta, Ikalto, the Telavi
Museum and the city of Telavi itself. During his free time, Giorgi Kevkhishvili
also identified several locations where drilling could be undertaken to access
underground artesian water supplies. [Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal
Collection of Giorgi Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 27.]
As noted above, the local population had favoured Giorgi
Kevkhishvili's model of the monument. Accordingly, he provided the Telavi
Executive Committee with a sample of the documentation required for casting the
bronze monument to Erekle II, together with the bank account details of the
foundry responsible for casting the monument, so that an advance payment could
be transferred. [Telavi Historical Museum, Giorgi Jashiashvili Archive,
Materials Concerning the Erection of the Monument to Erekle II, 1958–1959, Fund
No. 11872, Notebook 6, p. 3.] (See Document 6.)
The cost of casting in bronze the sculpture of Erekle II,
depicted seated bareheaded on a Georgian horse, with his sword drawn and
raised, without a pedestal, amounted to 69,000 roubles. [Kakheti Regional
Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p.
28.] (See Document 7.)
According to Giorgi Jashiashvili, after the sculptors had
departed, events unfolded as follows:
“When the sculptor Bilanashvili heard that the models had
been brought to Telavi, he began approaching various individuals and declared
that he could make the monument more cheaply. One of the district officials was
supporting him in this undertaking. On the other hand, Mr. B. brought Utmelidze
into the matter, who declared that he could produce something even better, free
of charge, and cast it himself in concrete... Asatashvili insisted that
Bilanashvili should make the monument, while Mr. B. demanded that Utmelidze
should make it. They paid no attention whatsoever to the fact that the work had
already been completed. What could I do? ... A project that had started so
promisingly was ruined.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 29.]
Three years later, in August 1961, Giorgi Jashiashvili
wrote:
“I was interested in seeing the monument erected... I did
not care whether Bilanashvili or Utmelidze made it, as long as the monument was
built. However, the former demanded a substantial advance payment and would not
begin without it, while the latter was simply incapable of undertaking such a
major project. Kevkhishvili wanted Utmelidze to become the author of the model
he had already created and even made him such an offer... But Utmelidze refused
to agree, insisting that he himself had to create something outstanding, which
he ultimately failed to do. And so, a good initiative came to nothing, and the
question of the monument remains awaiting an honest and dedicated person who
genuinely cares about it.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 29.]
As for the person who would eventually take up the cause of
the monument to Erekle II, that individual turned out to be Medea (Mediko)
Mezvrishvili, Chairwoman of the Telavi District Executive Committee in the
1970s. It was at her initiative and, apparently, in response to the prevailing
public sentiment in Telavi that, in the early 1970s, large-scale works began in
the territory of Batonis Tsikhe. These works involved demolishing buildings and
structures erected within the historic fortress complex during the Russian
Imperial and Soviet periods, thereby clearing the area east of Batonis Tsikhe
for the erection of the monument to Erekle II.
It appears that Medea (Mediko) Mezvrishvili, Chairwoman of
the Telavi District Executive Committee, took into account the “bitter
experience” of her predecessor, Giorgi Jashiashvili, and refrained from
organising public discussions of the proposed models for the monument to Erekle
II. Instead, she commissioned the renowned sculptor Merab Merabishvili to
create the monument. The sculpture of Erekle II, produced by Merabishvili, was
ceremonially unveiled in Telavi on 24 April 1971. The architect responsible for
the monument and the surrounding area was Teimuraz (Temo) Kandelaki.
The subject of our research does not include an assessment
of the artistic merits or shortcomings of this particular monument.
Nevertheless, it should be noted that, at the time, some residents of Telavi
expressed dissatisfaction with its appearance. This dissatisfaction is
reflected in a letter sent by Giorgi Jashiashvili to the director of the Telavi
Historical Museum at the time:
“The dream of seeing a monument to Patara Kakhi erected in
Telavi has finally come true. This was Mediko's personal initiative; no one
else should claim credit for it, since attempts had been made before, but the
previous officials regarded the idea as ridiculous and sometimes opposed it,
either deliberately or unintentionally.
What has been accomplished is a good thing. Nevertheless,
one cannot fail to note that the pedestal of the monument is excellent, indeed
the finest of its kind. However, we expected to see a monument to Patara Kakhi
as a warrior who defended his homeland with a sword in his hand, rather than as
a representative of the clergy holding a cross. It was the Patriarch who held a
cross – Patara Kakhi's sword was never once turned upside down; his sword never
bowed, nor would there have been any reason for it to do so...
The monument has taken on the appearance of a patriarch.
This is precisely why the model of the monument was never subjected to
extensive public discussion and did not receive public evaluation, as happened
with other monuments. The public judgement of this monument is therefore
already widely known.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 41.] (See Document 4.)
In Jashiashvili's opinion:
“The monument to Patara Kakhi should have been erected in a
form resembling the model shown in the photograph, depicting a Georgian on a
horse – a horse capable of overcoming every obstacle – with his sword
extended... and not as a praying figure holding a cross. A person who does
nothing but pray cannot defend his homeland...
Perhaps I am mistaken. Maybe the sculptor possesses
historical materials showing that Erekle held his sword upside down and
addressed his army or his people with a cross. If such evidence exists, then
the monument fulfils its intended purpose, although I do not believe that such
evidence exists.
5 May 1972.”
[Kakheti Regional Archive, Personal Collection of Giorgi
Jashiashvili, Fund No. 491, File 8, p. 41.]
Such were some of the opinions expressed in Telavi
concerning the newly erected monument to Erekle II. Time, however, has
delivered a different verdict. Today, the monument created by the sculptor
Merab Merabishvili is recognised as one of the principal symbols of Telavi, and
its significance extends beyond the local context. In the historical
consciousness of contemporary Georgian society, it represents the broader,
historically established image of Erekle II.
………………………………
Although this interpretation is not discussed in my
article, I believe it may nevertheless be of interest to the reader.
I think that the monument to Erekle II erected in Telavi
bears, to some extent, a resemblance to the traditional representation of Saint
George. As is well known, Saint George is not merely a symbol of the Christian
faith; he also embodies the ideals of a fighting spirit, heroism, and victory
over evil.
Taking this into consideration, it is possible to suggest
that the cross-shaped sword held by the king in the monument created by Merab
Merabishvili may represent more than a simple military attribute. It may also
express the historical and political identity of Kakheti, in which military
strength and religious devotion were closely intertwined.
In this context, Erekle II is often perceived as a
historical figure who fought to defend his country and preserve its political
independence. His military career and campaigns in defence of Georgia create a
certain symbolic parallel with the image of Saint George as a Christian hero
fighting against evil.
Thus, the monument to Erekle II in Telavi may be
interpreted not as a direct “image” of Saint George or an immediate
reproduction of his iconography, but rather as one possible expression of the
monument’s creator’s historical and political interpretation, associated with
the symbolic and ideological image of Saint George.
Several significant parallels can be
identified from this perspective:
·
The mounted figure — In the monument to Erekle II, the king is
depicted mounted on a horse. This creates a certain visual parallel with the
traditional iconography of Saint George, who is also frequently represented as
a mounted warrior.
·
The weapon — The sword held by Erekle is not limited to its function as a
combat weapon; it may also carry an additional symbolic meaning. Particularly
noteworthy is its visual resemblance to the shape of a cross.
·
Christian symbolism — The cross-like form may be regarded as an
important element of religious and cultural memory, connecting the image of
Erekle II with Georgia’s Christian historical heritage.
·
The image of the warrior-hero — A parallel may be drawn between the figures
of Saint George and Erekle II, not in terms of direct iconographic identity,
but through a shared symbolic model: a mounted warrior associated with the
ideas of defence, combat, and victory.
Thus, the representation of Saint George in
Christian iconography and the monument to Erekle II are not direct
continuations of one another. Nevertheless, they can be compared within a
broader cultural and iconographic context in which the mounted figure, the
weapon, and the symbolism of the cross are associated with religious, military,
and historical memory.
From this perspective, the monument to Erekle
II may be interpreted as a monumental representation of a historical king, in
which several symbolic layers intersect: military heroism, Christian memory,
and national-historical identity.
P.S.
On 24 September of this year, a monument to
Erekle II was unveiled in Tbilisi, on Kakheti Highway, in the so-called Samgori
Park. It was created by a group of sculptors based on a sketch by Merab
Merabishvili. Presumably, when preparing this sketch, Merab Merabishvili took
into account just one of the suggestions expressed back in 1958 by Medea
Mezvrishvili and others: “It would be desirable to erect [the monument]
depicting Erekle in the midst of battle, bareheaded. It would be good if the
author took one observation into consideration: Georgians did not go into
battle without headgear. Therefore, Erekle should be wearing a helmet.”
