Leont’i Mroveli’s Hybrid Presentation of King Mirian

Abstract

The cycle of histories at the start of Kartlis tskhovreba has long attracted the attention of scholars. Traditionally credited to the eleventh-century archbishop Leont’i Mroveli, many historians now understand the story of Georgian ethnogenesis as a compendium of as many as three distinctive texts. The provenance of at least two of the components of Tskhorebay kartvelta mepeta belongs to a time well before Mroveli. These days, an eighth- or ninth-century date for the compendium’s initial section is not unusual. This section of the text undoubtedly rests on yet older oral and perhaps written traditions; it claims to reveal the very beginnings of the Georgians within the context of Caucasian history, the origins of their monarchy, and dynastic kings up to Mirian. At the same time, it prioritizes the eastern region of Kartli.
Within its account of Mirian, the text abruptly cuts off and a complete version of the hagiographical Life of Nino ensues. This vita is immediately followed by a brief narrative of the early Christian kings after Mirian. The tonal shift between the presentation of the pre-Christian and Christianizing Mirian is remarkable.
Why should this be the case? In this article, I shall suggest an explanation as to why an entire hagiographical text – which survives independently in the corpus Moktsevay kartlisay – has been incorporated into the historiographical Kartlis tskhovreba. Further, we must consider why the initial account of Mirian terminates abruptly, on the eve of his Christianization. In Kartlis tskhovreba, the remainder of Mirian’s reign is treated exclusively by The Life of Nino. The answer is not simply the royal adoption of Christianity. Instead, the key lies in the original but lost versions of Georgian historiographical sources as well as Caucasia’s integration within the Iranic world in late antiquity.