Abstract
This article examines the linguistic model of early Christianity in the Caucasus, with a particular focus on Georgia. It argues that the rapid and unified Christianization of western and eastern Georgia was made possible by a pre-existing, consolidated Kartvelian (Zan-Georgian) linguistic unity. Drawing on historical sources and the linguistic research of G. Machavariani and T. Gamkrelidze, the study demonstrates that during the apostolic era the Kartvelian language had not yet fully fragmented into separate branches and functioned as a stable medium of administration, education, and culture. Christianity in Georgia did not create a new linguistic order; rather, it was proclaimed, translated, and institutionalized in the already authoritative Old Georgian language, which became the sole medium of liturgy and Christian literature throughout the entire ethno-cultural territory of Georgia.
Keywords: Old Georgian language; Kartvelian linguistic unity; Christianization of Georgia; Christianity in the Caucasus; Zan-Georgian; linguistic policy of the early Church.
1. Introduction
In Georgian historiographical tradition, the assertion that “no language other than Georgian was known” does not imply absolute dialectal uniformity, but rather reflects the public, state, and cultural unity of language across the territory extending from the Black Sea to eastern Georgia and the borders of Caucasian Albania¹.
Ancient authors such as Strabo and Pliny the Elder describe Colchis and Iberia as interconnected regions². The western “Lazi” and the eastern “Iberians” are political designations; culturally and linguistically, however, they form a single whole. These data support the conclusion that, prior to Christianity, a Georgian-speaking ethno-cultural space already existed that did not require a new linguistic framework for the reception of Christianity.
2. Zan-Georgian Linguistic Unity in the Apostolic Era
The chronology of internal differentiation within the Kartvelian languages is crucial for understanding early Christianization. According to Machavariani and Gamkrelidze, the disintegration of the Zan-Georgian linguistic unity began around the turn of the Common Era (1st century BCE – 1st century CE)³.
During the apostolic era and the first centuries of Christian expansion (1st–4th centuries CE), the language had not yet fully divided into independent branches. The populations of western and eastern Georgia existed within a common linguistic space, which greatly facilitated preaching and liturgical communication.
Christian preaching was conducted in a unified Georgian language, intelligible to both the Lazi and the Iberians. This linguistic situation explains the formulation found in Greco-Roman sources concerning Saint Nino, who is said to have “converted the Iberians and the Lazi,” that is, the entire nation rather than separate tribes⁴.
3. Old Georgian as a Language of Education and Culture
At the time of Christianization, the Georgian language already functioned as a medium of education, state administration, and culture⁵.
The term “Old Georgian” should be understood here in a functional and chronological sense: it denotes a language that possessed sufficient structural maturity, lexical resources, and social authority to serve as a vehicle for Christian liturgy and literature. Consequently, after the adoption of Christianity, no linguistic competition arose within Georgia. Svan, Megrelian, Laz, and other Kartvelian dialects did not become liturgical languages, as a single authoritative sacred language already existed.
4. Liturgy and Literature across the Territory of Georgia
Linguistic unity naturally led to the use of a single Georgian language in liturgy and literature throughout the territory of Georgia—from Abkhazia through Svaneti and Egrisi to Kakheti and Meskheti. Christianity introduced new religious content into an already authoritative language. Early Georgian biblical translations demonstrate a strategy focused on conveying meaning rather than mechanically calquing foreign syntax, allowing Georgian to develop rapidly into a fully-fledged liturgical and theological language⁶.
5. Linguistic Differences and Theological Self-Perception
(A Georgian–Armenian Comparison)
A comparison of the linguistic strategies of the Georgian and Armenian Churches reveals differing theological self-perceptions. Armenian translations emphasize strict correspondence to Greek dogmatic formulas, producing complex calques and compound constructions that are precise but less flexible. The Georgian tradition favors semantic incarnation—the idea that a term must “live” within the language and be comprehensible in liturgy. This contrast is reflected in medieval Georgian–Armenian polemics, in which the Armenian side defended formal precision, while the Georgian side emphasized dogmatic meaning⁷.
6. Conclusion
The spread of Christianity in Georgia cannot be explained solely by political or missionary factors. During the apostolic era and in the fourth century, a unified, stable, and socially authoritative Georgian language existed. According to Machavariani and Gamkrelidze, the disintegration of the Zan-Georgian linguistic unity was still at an early stage, ensuring mutual intelligibility between the populations of western and eastern Georgia⁸.
Christian preaching took place within this unified linguistic space, which explains why Greco-Roman sources refer collectively to the “Iberians and the Lazi,” encompassing the entire nation. Christianity did not create a new language; it transformed Old Georgian into the principal instrument of liturgy, theology, and cultural identity.
Thus, the Caucasian—and particularly the Georgian—model of early Christian linguistic policy represents a unique case in which religion was built upon an already existing linguistic reality, thereby reinforcing its historical durability.
