After the disintegration of the colossal Soviet empire, the majority of its former republics suddenly came to face challenges associated with the protection of their cultural heritage. Natural and cultural landscapes and architecture representing national symbols and urban heritage came under threat. Protected territories of significant historical and cultural value appeared especially attractive for new construction projects.

In these circumstances, national and local governmental agencies acted to the detriment of the cultural heritage as they authorized the construction of ugly structures by shrinking or adjusting protected areas. The same is true of improper restoration and rehabilitation works initiated for the sake of attracting tourists, thus contributing to the increase of irreversible losses.

National authorities in charge of monument protection proved unprepared to address these negative processes. In some cases, newly reorganized agencies failed to keep the expected standards; in others, the reorganizations have not even started or proceed at a very slow pace, while old management systems are unable to adapt to the new reality.

To trace these processes in Georgia, I will focus on the case of Mtskheta, which has been on the World Heritage List since 1994. The initial name of the nomination, Mtskheta Museum-Reserve was changed in 2005. Now it is called ­Mtskheta Historical Monuments – Svetitskhoveli Cathedral, Samtavro Convent, Monastery of the Holy Cross. In 2009, Session 33 of the World Heritage Committee took the decision to move the historical monuments of Mtskheta to the World Heritage in Danger list.

The town of Mtskheta, now the centre of a municipality, is situated 21 kilometres north of Tbilisi. Rich archaeological material and historical records reveal that Mtskheta and its environs have been inhabited since the 4th-3rd millennia BC (Early and Middle Bronze Ages). The settlements merged into a town, ‘Greater Mtskheta’, which consisted of individual districts united by a single defence system.

For eight hundred years from the 4th-3rd century BC, Mtskheta was the capital and political centre of Kartli, the first Georgian state established on the territory of eastern Georgia (the capital was moved to Tbilisi in the 6th century). The population of Greater Mtskheta was multinational:  Georgians, Greeks, Armenians, Persians and Jewish refugees from Jerusalem lived here.

Mtskheta and its environs are rich in tangible monuments evidencing to an uninterrupted historical and cultural life dating back to the earliest times. At the same time, the area is remarkable for its intangible spiritual and historical values. Researchers believe that the dialect of Mtskheta served as the basis for the formation of the old Georgian literary language, preserved to our days thanks to the oldest literary sources (6th-11th centuries).

Mtskheta is distinguished by an impressive natural setting. The space is marvellously homogeneous and compact. Each visible detail is of special historical significance (Fig. 1). This place is associated with the most remarkable episodes of the nation’s past, and any unreasonable intervention is tantamount to the erasure of history from the nation’s memory.

Mtskheta is situated in the gorge, at the confluence of the Mtkvari and Aragvi rivers. There are many such confluences in Georgia, however, the corresponding Georgian term, khertvisi, attested since the 5th -7th centuries, seems to be more specifically associated with the Mtkvari / Aragvi confluence. Establishment of Mtskheta is linked with this site. According to the Georgian historical tradition, Kartlos, the eponymous ethnarch of the Georgians, ‘came to a place where the Aragvi flows into the Mtkvari,’ while his son Mtskhetos ‘built a town where the Mtkvari and Aragvi meet and named it Mtskheta after his own name.’

Above the confluence of the sluggishly flowing Mtkvari and Aragvi rises Mount Golgotha, on which the Monastery of the Holy Cross is erected. The earliest church on this site was built in 545-586, while the main church dates to the 586-605.

The Mount of Kartli stands out in sharp relief in the distance, descending from whose summit downwards to the river the architectural and archaeological site Armaz-Tsikhe is located. This is a fortified settlement typical of an early stage of human development. Archaeological excavations have revealed a system of fortified structures and a royal palace. Armaz-Tsikhe is mentioned in the works of Greek and Roman authors. It existed from the 4th-3rd centuries BC to the third decade of the 8th century AD.

Natural and architectural setting of the present day Mtskheta comprise architectural landmarks of the city such as Svetitskhoveli Cathedral (1010-1029), rich in archaeological material, and Samtavro Convent (main church of which dates from the 1030s). These are surrounded by the chaotic urban fabric of the historic district. Respectively, three conventional areas of natural and historical anthropogenic landscape are formed creating a single whole (Fig. 2).

The boundaries of Mtskheta have altered over the centuries. The town territory shrank remarkably in the late Middle Ages, though its outstanding significance was not shaken.

It is believed that the city of Mtskheta ceased to exist after the devastating campaign of the Caliph Marwan II ibn Muhhamad, called by the Georgians Murvan the Deaf because of his exceptional cruelty. According to the historical records, the Georgian kings did not purposefully restore the urban status of Mtskehta so as to protect it from other invaders.

The territory of Mskheta significantly shrank at the turn of the 20th century, reducing to the triangle at the Mtkvari and Aragvi confluence.

The history of Mtsketa is a succession of ups and downs, but its sacral significance has never been questioned. In the pre-Christian period this place was the abode of the supreme pagan idols. The Georgian pagan pantheon was quite diverse. It reflected the influences of the powers that had political and cultural relations, first with the Georgian tribes and later with the Georgian Kingdom. According to the historical sources, ‘there were two hills and two idols on them, Armaz and Zaden, and there were other idols too.’

In early 4th century, the enlightener of Georgia, St. Nino, whom the Georgian Church proclaimed an equal to the Apostles, came from Cappadocia to Mtskheta. Many and varied miracles are associated with her name. The Georgian King Mirian and the royal family were converted to the Christian faith, after which Christianity was proclaimed the state religion. Mtskheta had a special role in the establishment of the new religion in the country. At Saint Nino’s instruction, a big wooden cross was erected in the place where the Monastery of the Holy Cross now stands. Its pedestal has survived in the main church of the monastery down to the present day, although much altered. The conversion of Georgia and episodes from Saint Nino’s life are described in Georgian, Armenian, Greek and Roman historical sources.

It should also be noted that the liturgical rite of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem was compulsory for Eastern Christendom, as a result of which the sacred geography of Jerusalem acquired special relevance. The early stage of the spread of Christianity in Georgia is marked by the introduction of Syrian/Palestinian place names associated with the life of Christ: Antioch, Gethsemane, Golgotha, and Bethlehem.

_ _ _

From the 8th century to 1956, Mtskheta was deprived of the status of a town. It ‘missed’ a millennium of urban development. On the other hand, it also escaped the construction norms and regulations introduced into Georgia by Russian bureaucrats in the 19th century.

Photographs of Mtskheta from the turn of the 20th century show terraced houses built on a sloping relief. Most of these had flat roofs. From the 20th century onwards, pitched roofs become more and more frequent, while in the mid-20th century houses with flat roofs were no longer built (Fig. 3). 

The majority of the old houses vanished, although a district adjacent to Svetitskhoveli still preserves residential and subsidiary structures from the 18th-19th and early 20th centuries. These make up the original core of the old settlement and to a certain extent contribute to the preservation of the historically established layout of the town. They help to trace the general urban development of Mtskheta and local building traditions.

It is quite difficult to elaborate a rehabilitation method for old Mtskheta districts. Old structures, which had been part of the urban fabric, were significantly altered later. Sometimes, building layers from the 18th–19th and 20th centuries can be found in the same structure.

In 2010–11, the urban area adjacent to Svetitskhoveli was rehabilitated without adequate research and planning. This rehabilitation project was not discussed and agreed with the cultural heritage protection agencies. During the works, building materials incompatible with old structures were used. Consequently, this rehabilitation resulted is an invented architecture, far remote from the real one and mainly aimed at delighting the tourist’s eye (Fig. 4).

No general development plan has so far been drawn up for Mtskheta. It is a living town and the appearance of new structures, even in the vicinity of architectural monuments, is quite understandable and sometimes necessary. However, nothing can justify the building of a tourist information centre within 10 metres of the western gates of Svetitskhoveli (Fig. 5). Its central façade is crammed with hypertrophic architectural elements from Georgian traditional dwelling and medieval architecture. It should be noted that no official building permit was issued when this structure was built.

Recent developments in the area between Svetitskhoveli and the Monastery of the Holy Cross have inflicted serious damage on Mtskheta and its environs (Fig. 6). The construction of a police station and of buildings to house the Georgian Patent Agency and a House of Justice were started illegally, but were legalized by a governmental decree of September 2012. This document envisages the shrinking of the protected historical and architectural landscape zones.

Although construction works are suspended, the fact remains that construction work has already been legalized in the area between the two medieval architectural masterpieces, Svetitskhoveli and the Monastery of the Holy Cross. This became possible because the territory, which had never been built on before, was given the status of a building regulation zone.

Our ancestors had preserved Mtskheta. Life has not stopped here for hundreds of years. Although reduced in size, Mtskheta continues to live. The area has been protected by national law since the 20th century, and by international regulations from a later period, and it is our duty to preserve it for the next generations.

The town and its environs, which – apart from their cultural and historic value – are no less promising in terms of economic benefit if properly developed, face serious threat under the present circumstances.

It is essential that all properly understand the significance of Mtskheta and take practical steps towards its protection. Individual protection efforts do not seem sufficient; solutions are to be sought in the co-operation of central and local authorities, academic circles, cultural heritage protection agencies, the Georgian Patriarchy, the business sector, and the general public. Specialists must clearly convey to all of these the deplorable and irrevocable consequences that inadequate policies may engender.

The Georgian public is certainly not indifferent to cultural heritage issues. It is impermissible that our society become aware of such grave historical losses only after they have become irrecoverable.

Dr. Tsitsino Chachkhunashvili
G. Chubinashvili National Research Centre
for Georgian Art History and Heritage Preservation
ICOMOS Georgia