My research aims to comprehend the essence of “national cuisine” and examine it as a sign of national identity and a representation of cultural memory. The content of the research topic scope extends beyond cooking and enables us to discover a response to the question- what is the significance of the list of national recipes for nationhood? It is evident that what appears to be “simple” food turns out to be a “complex” national phenomenon after placing the research topic within the domain of cultural studies and nationalism theories.

Using the theories of German Professors of Culture Studies Jan and Aleida Assmanns, I considered national cuisine as a “memory area”, a “place of memory¹” and a “connective structure²” that connects the nation’s past with present and every member of the nation with each other.

Based on the modernist theories of nationalism from researchers - Ernest Gellner, Benedict Anderson, Anthony Smith and Eric Hobsbawm, I tried to understand “Georgian Cuisine” as a product of the modernist era of nationalism - as an “invented tradition³” by an “imaginary society⁴”.

At the beginning of the article, I would like to clarify the terms. The definition given in the title - “invented tradition” comes from Eric Hobsbawm’s book “The Invention of Tradition” (1983)⁵. It was from the 1980s that it became popular to emphasize the modernity of the phenomenon of nationalism and to shift research emphasis to “invention” and “imaginative mechanisms”. According to Hobsbawm, “invented  tradition” refers to those cultural customs that, at first look, appear to be indigenous traditions but are actually more recent and frequently consciously “manufactured” by public figures.

Hobsbawm asserts that examples of the creation of traditions can be found frequently in the modernist age of nation-building and that their “invention” contributes to strengthening national identity and consolidation.

Taking into account this viewpoint, I became even more convinced that the national cuisine in its current shape could not have existed prior to the emergence of a nation of related peoples. It was only when the unity of related peoples consciously acknowledged themselves as a nation that it was reconsidered as a symbol of the nation.

It was the building and consolidation of the national project that required “everything” that would help the nation to become a nation. This is how the list of collective anonymous recipes, which previously existed in the form of “dialects” of food on the settlement landscape of related peoples, became symbol dishes carrying national charge.

National Cuisine - as a Symbol of Cultural Memory and an Identity-building Text

Before considering national cuisine as an “invented tradition” of the era of nationalism, it is necessary to understand it as a symbol of collective/cultural memory and an identity-building text.

What is collective memory, and how does it differ from individual memory? A question arises here: national cuisine is intertwined with food, taste and smell, which means its closeness to bodily, individual sensations. How did it become a marker of collective identity? How did food move from the subjective experience of one person to the collective memory of the nation?

Collective memory is the shared memory of the community, unity and nation, which is also called “social memory” by French researchers,⁶ while “collective memory” is divided into two parts - “communicative” and “cultural memory” by representatives of the German school⁷.

Cultural memory speaks through symbols and does not have a limited lifespan like individual and communicative memory. The cultural memory lasts for centuries if the communicative memory incorporates the memories of three to four generations. This is due to the fact that people (living beings), whose lifespans are only 80–100 years, are the bearers of "individual" and "communicative" memory. On the other hand, the symbols that carry cultural memory are inanimate artefacts, such as monuments, myths, archives, and memorials; therefore their presence is not finite in time.

The purpose of cultural memory symbols and codes is to deal with time by passing along cultural knowledge from one generation to the next. It is through the shared symbol-orientation that the generations in different eras found their ethnic, religious and national identities. “Georgianness", “Frenchness” and  “Ukrainianess”  are a combination of codes and symbols that give a Georgian, a French, and a Ukrainian a “key” to the heart of their own nation.

Symbols of collective memory are a flag, coat of arms, homeland, famous ancestors, golden age, monuments, archives, libraries, national dress, memorial dates, beliefs, myths and others. These symbols became the strength of national identity in the era of nationalism. In my opinion, national cuisine also has an honorable place in this list - as a symbol of collective memory and a marker of national identity.

Through the lens of nationalism, national cuisine is a “constructive text/narrative of identity”⁸. Any type of text, whether it is known to the public or not, that is crucial for the development of a shared identity is referred to as an identity-building text. These can include historical writings, cultural and political manifestos, philosophical treatises, novels, revolutionary songs, private correspondence, autobiographical notes, and more. Identity-building factors serve as cultural memory symbols and points of reference for citizens of a country.

The fact that contemporary nations view national food as a component of national narrative rather than as delicious or gorgeous dishes representative of their country's climate, environment, or customs was made abundantly obvious when studying the cuisines of many countries. National cuisines are an anthology of gastronomic traditions from every region and dialect of the nation. Like an anthem and a flag, national cuisines have the power to unite people.

Throughout my research, it became clear to me through a variety of examples that for a modern individual, a national cuisine has much more information than only the precise recipe, flavor, and aroma. For example, there are many cases when a member of the nation has not even tasted this or that national dish, but the one who takes it away from them, will “die for it”. For example, we can think of the Georgian dish “Chakapuli”, which is traditionally made with sheep/lamb meat. In the survey that I conducted in 2021, it was revealed that 30% of Georgians do not like Chakapuli prepared with lamb meat, and 3% have not tried it at all. Nevertheless, they also sustainably protect, praise and are proud of this dish as a “monument” of national cuisine.

From these and other examples it is clear that a dish is not always a “dish”, it is part of a “national brand”. And because this is so, the “national cuisine,” as a symbol of nationhood, carries all the emotions that other elements of the nation's “grand narrative” do. Therefore, it is protected and guarded as well as other symbols.

In the process of research, I came across many examples where it seems possible to “fight” for the sake of the dish. In the article “Caucasian War for National Cuisine⁹”, ethnographer Ruzana Tsaturiani writes that “culinary wars” in the South Caucasus are taking place on different fronts and that the question - “dolma” or “tolma”? -  is not a culinary question at all, because even presidents argue about it. The researcher brings the quote of the President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev at the annual meeting of the Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan as an example: “If we ask Armenians what “Dolma” means in Armenian, they will not be able to answer you. Just as Karabakh is just a word for them, they don't understand it.”¹⁰  Also, in 2011, the press met the visit of Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili to Armenia with “culinary sarcasm”. Articles with the titles “Saakashvili will try to protect Khachapuri and Saperavi in Yerevan” or “Will Saakashvili discuss the problems of Churchkhela and Khachapuri in Yerevan?” were devoted to this visit. Ruzana Tsaturian writes that if the Armenian-Georgian “culinary conflict” has the character of a “marketing war” and rarely goes beyond the scope of media debates, the Armenian-Azerbaijani gastronomic front is “more complicated, the culinary battles have moved into the political field”  and “are directed by the government agencies”, and public organizations and media in Armenia are busy discussing the issues of “culinary appropriation” by the neighbors¹¹.

An example of the “symbolism” of the dish is also the recent hot discussion on the social network about matsoni: is matsoni Georgian or Armenian?  Representatives of both nations were involved in the “matsoni disputes” and mutual accusations went beyond the radius of the “matsoni pot”. Intra-national conflicts are also frequent, for example, Upper and Lower Svans argued, for a long time on social networks, because of the terms: Kubdar-Kuptar¹².

We see that there is a national narrative behind this seemingly “just a culinary issue”. The main function of the national narrative is to form and strengthen the feeling of group identity¹³. In foreign research, the term “Gastronationalism” is found, which is part of nationalism and is accompanied by the feeling of “ours” and “others”, “relatives” and “enemies”¹⁴. And where “enemies” to the national identity  appear, the situation becomes prone to “explosion”.

The study and analysis of specific examples gave me an opportunity to confirm the presumption that, as in the case of other national symbols, for example, the coat of arms, the flag or the anthem and others, “mistakes” are not allowed concerning national dishes. In the “ill use” of this topic, harmless food and drink may leave the "kitchen walls" and reveal the dangerous anomalies of nationalism. That is why I consider it necessary to conduct academic studies and analysis of the phenomenon of national cuisines, taking into account the theories of culturology and nationalism, and the correct popularization of the obtained conclusions.

When did food become a national symbol? Could the identity of nations be reinforced by food and everyday acts? Paul Nugent in his work: “Do Nations Have Stomachs? Food, Drink and Imagined Community in Africa” analyzes the discussions that exist around the African Braai¹⁵. A braai is a South African barbecue that looks like a regular barbecue but is not. Braai is a symbol of South African food culture, a national portrait. Braai, as a symbol, carries information where the main taste and aroma are not the main ones, but the magical force around which the South African identity is consolidated.

The main agent of consolidation, in this case, is the fire lit for roasting the meet: braai in South Africa is only cooked on fire (similar to us) and eaten around the fire (the fire is not put out throughout the meal, therefore, the braai fire is “another fire”).

Can you imagine what could happen if some other nation declared Chakapuli as theirs?! Will we give it up? We will not. This is despite the fact that Chakapuli is just a dish, and moreover, “Chakapuli” is not even mentioned in the first Georgian cooking book.¹⁶

Although we don't know who, where and when wrote the recipes like the anonymous fairy tales, the “national cuisine” has the ability to consolidate a nation. “Satsivi” and “Chakapuli”¹⁷ unite us in being “Georgian” as well as “Natsarkekia” and “Komble”¹⁸. “Khachapuri” and “Kubdari” are the markers of the “Georgian” identity, as well as the Georgian language, Georgian passport, Georgian grape varieties, and the method of making wine in kvevri, flag, anthem and coat of arms and everything else that indicates Georgianness.

In the article, “How national is food culture? A Case Study of Regional Food Practices in Turkey,” Yesim Zaim writes that food plays an important role in national identity. Certain dishes and ingredients are considered national elements and determine the eating habits and food culture of this nation, and therefore from the agenda of nationalism - food - is national¹⁹.

And yet, where do national cuisines begin? The simple answer to this question is as follows: national cuisine begins where the nation begins. This means that the national cuisine is of the same age as the nation, and it did not exist before the birth of nations. Before “national cuisine”, there was food that was created on the settlement landscape of ethnically related peoples and passed from generation to generation, but with completely different “information”: there was food - sacred and profane, rich and poor, but not national, belonging to the nation. The symbol, “national cuisine” is an artefact; it is a specially created collection and contains a list of native dishes.

Ernest Gellner, Benedict Anderson, and Anthony Smith are the authors of the three main ideas that explain the country's birthdate. According to all three authors, nationalism is an artefact; it did not exist from the dawn of creation but emerged during a particular historical era.

According to Gellner, of the three stages of history, hunter-gatherer, agro-writing, and industrial, nations emerged during the transition from the second to the third stage²⁰.

According to Benedict Anderson, the decline of religion gave rise to new conceptions of time, which in turn gave rise to the possibility of imagining the nation²¹. Anderson writes that nationalism is a mixture of secularization, human diversity, capitalism, and printing technology.²²

Anthony Smith claims that nationalism is a group’s attempt to create a feeling of common identity throughout history. Even in the periods before nationalism, ethnic communities gave the impression of having a shared identity, but identity had a different foundation and meaning.

In a country where church services and prayers have been held in Georgian since the Middle Ages, and this area was named after their country, no written monument mentions “Georgian Cuisine”. The collective identity of the members of the country, who conducted the service in the Georgian language, was based on the Christian faith and the narrative of the dynasty of kings in “The Georgian Chronicles”. Accordingly, “Georgian cuisine” - the cuisine of the Georgian nation, did not exist in pre-modern Georgia. It was published at a time when printing technologies made it possible to collect anonymous, diverse, “dialectical” recipes into a single collection and give it the symbolism of an identity-building text.

In his book “Mythologies”, Roland Barthes mentions  that wine and national dishes evoke a special time and space in which a Frenchman lives. For him, wine, cheese and culture are national wealth, a national necessity. Along with wine, Barthes names beefsteak and potatoes as parts of national mythology. A Frenchman dreams of them at any time, and, as a “national necessity”, they are everywhere where the Frenchman is: in cheap or expensive restaurants, bourgeois or bohemian dinners. This means, writes Roland Barthes, that all three are nationalized rather than socialized²³. “Nationalized” food and drink have the significance of the national narrative, with its help, the nation’s past - present, and every individual representative of the nation is identified with the nation. Barthes cites an example that clearly shows how the “taste” of a national food can take you back to the heart of a nation. After the Indochina Act of Reconciliation, General Christian de Castries requested fried potatoes for dinner, much to the astonishment of those around him. Barthes explains this fact as follows: the general was well aware of French symbolism and understood that fried potatoes were a symbol of Frenchness. Therefore, the desire for fried potatoes was not a vulgar-materialistic reflex, but a ritual gesture with which the general celebrated the return to the heart of the French people.

“Returning to the bosom of the nation” is a voluntary act by which we join the collective identity of the nation. Most often, national food and drink “brings us back” to the heart of the nation. The “code” of the nation, the marker of national identity, is stored with special emotion in food and drink. According to the responses of the emigrants participating in my survey, after family members, the main object of nostalgia is Georgian cuisine (its taste and aroma).

The question here is since when did “beefsteak” and “wine” become a reference point of identity for every Frenchman? Or for Georgians - satsivi and chakapuli became the symbol of Georgianness? Eugen Weber writes in the book “Peasants into Frenchmen” that until the bourgeois revolution, people living in French villages or small towns did not even know that they were ethnically French, which lasted almost until the First World War.

To put it another way, the “Frenchness” of the French and the “Georgianness” of the Georgians, as a flag and anthem, need symbols and identity-building texts. This role is perfectly performed by the national cuisine.

When was Georgian cuisine “invented”? Although ancient Georgians/Georgian tribes have been making both wine and food since the Neolithic era²⁴, the first book titled “Georgian Cuisine” was published in 1874, during the era of nationalism.

Anthony Smith states that nationalism emerged in the historical realm as an ideological movement at the end of the 18th century. A “strong feeling of sacredness” underpins nationalism, which aims to attain autonomy, unity, and identity of a nation (religion, symbols, collective rituals). Smith’s argument contends that political and economic reasons alone cannot account for a commitment to national identity. Re-examining the material chosen from the ethnic heritage leads to the consolidation of a nation by this nation’s intellectual elite.

In the material selected from the ethnic heritage is meant a national rethinking of the common faith, the common land, and the common language, which the nation needs to be a nation. We should boldly include national cuisine into this honorable list, which manages to consolidate the nation with its nationality, with its emotion combined with national identity.

The “Invention” of Georgian Cuisine

If we rely on modernist national theories, then until the 19th century, before the birth of nations, there should not have been a national cuisine. This is confirmed by the analysis of the 10 oldest cookbooks in the world, which date back to BC 1700 - AD 1390 and in which “national cuisine” is not mentioned²⁵. Ancient cookbooks are mainly devoted to describing the food of royal families and healthy eating. The first book called “French Cuisine” is by Francois Pierre Varennes and was published in 1651²⁶, before the first restaurant appeared²⁷. However, Varennes was the chef of kings, and his cuisine is royal, not every Frenchman’s.

In such a delicious and bread-rich country as Georgia, there was no cookbooks in the Georgian language until 1818. This is confirmed by Bagrat Batonishvili (Bagrationi), the son of the last king of Georgia, Giorgi XII, in the foreword of the book published in exile²⁸.

In the preface of the book, Bagrat Batonishvili writes: “I collected and translated for the sons of the Georgians, as there was nothing in the Georgian language before.”

As we can see, this is the first book of recipes printed in Georgian which was translated by the emigrated grandson of king  Erekle II²⁹.

And in 1874, a book was published, the title of which reads the word - Georgian: “Georgian Cuisine and Approved Information About Household Management”, compiled by Barbare Jorjadze (Tbilisi, Ekvtime Kheladze printing house).³⁰

In the preface, the author mentions three reasons for publishing the book: “Following  the changes of the time, the reform of the peasants and our current situation, I saw the need to compile a cookery book... This book is a guide in the kitchen, especially for making food practiced  in Georgia.”

It can be seen from the preface that the book is a “handbook” intended for “making” Georgian dishes. “Time changes”, “peasant reform” and “our current situation” became the reason for Barbare Jorjadze to write a book.

It is important that “Georgian Cuisine” is a book dictated by the time, the era that coincides with the formation of Georgian nationalism. Barbare Jorjadze worked in a time whose spirit was imbued with the theory of Kulturnation of the 19th century German historian Friedrich Meineke, and which “Tergdaleulebi”³¹ tried to establish in Georgia³².

Although I feel it is necessary to clarify some specifics in order to better understand the epochal significance of “Georgian Cuisine”, I will not examine the significance and specifics of the Georgian project of nationalism itself within the context of this article.

We find it intriguing that national projects are paying particular attention to the topic of women’s social roles. Nationalism, as a democratic ideology, eliminates all forms of inequality, including gender division. Barbare Jorjadze’s dedication to women reflects the tremendous purpose of a woman battling against gender inequity, even though she does not explicitly state in the book’s prologue that she expressly created the book for the national project.

The second edition of Jorjadze's book was published in 1914 and the foreword to it belongs to Barbare Jorjadze's daughter, Manana Jorjadze-Gechtman³³. She writes that her late mother “was not only a good housewife, but she also used to encourage others to take care of their families, support them and manage the family economically. She was not satisfied with a leisurely speech and wanted to spread “propaganda” among the housewives in writing. By the way, she intended to compile and publish Georgian Cuisine - because she felt that health is the first priority in the nation’s success and life”.

Unlike the first edition of “Georgian Cuisine”, the second edition clearly outlines 2 goals of the book: 1) “Propaganda” for a better life for women, empowering women to put their families on their feet and sustain themselves economically, and 2) A necessary factor for the nation’s success - taking care of the nation’s health.

At first glance, it can be considered a coincidence that the first book called “Georgian Cuisine” appears in the era of the formation of nationalism. However, the assumption of “coincidence” immediately loses its power when we consider the identity of the woman who compiled the book. The Georgian press of the 19th century is full of poems dedicated to Jorjadze and responses to her work, praising her public speeches and courage³⁴.

If we consider the book and the author in the dimension of their era, we can imagine “Georgian Cuisine”, like Georgian romanticism, as a cultural basis for the formation of nationalism³⁵, because being a nation voluntarily in the list of shared symbols for the great narrative of identity also needs shared flavors and aromas.

Conclusion

As we can see, nationalism studies, even in the era of globalization, remain the main discussion of interdisciplinary studies. The reason for such popularity of nationalism is investigated by the historian Anthony Smith in the book: “Chosen People, Sacred Sources of National Identity”³⁶. The author  writes that the emotions and passions that awaken national identity are very similar to religious feelings. According to Benedict Anderson, the origin of nationalism in the late eighteenth century was due to the erosion of religious belief and it legitimately took the place of religion.³⁷

While researching the examples of different countries, the fact that “national cuisines” in the form that it exists today is the expression of the era of nationalism was highlighted. The cuisine is part of the nation's “biography” and it is based on such “biographical” symbols that the nation is formed and constituted.³⁸

Based on the example of  different countries, it can be seen that already in the 20th century, it was popularized by the national elite. French historian Pascal Ory, in his book “French Gastronomic Discourse - From Birth to the Present” (1998), writes that Claude Lévi-Strauss's book “Mythologique”³⁹ published in 1968 was followed by the process of rehabilitation and rise of French cuisine by French intellectuals. “Falling” into the hands of intellectual elites, the national cuisine was finally consolidated as a “connective structure” of the national culture.

Published in 1874, “Georgian Cuisine”, a collection of anonymous recipes in one book, reached every child in every corner of Georgia. These recipes are Georgian; they belong to everyone, which gave the nation another support for its strength, unity, and identity.

That is why the national cuisine is an “invented tradition” that was “invented” everywhere when the nation needed any narrative of identity to consolidate the nation.

The “content” of national cuisines was fueled by the age of nationalism, and as Anthony Smith writes, nationalism “brought a massive and democratic character”. This can be clearly seen in the diachronic analysis of food cultures: if the food cultures of the ancient and feudal eras were strictly dichotomous, as the food of the rich and the poor, the sacred and the profane, the list of national dishes does not distinguish between social classes, it is for everyone, as a flag, as an anthem, of any social class and it is shared by education, age and gender. “Georgian Cuisine” is the cuisine of every member of the Georgian nation and tells the story of their collective taste, unity, and nation.

And who invents traditions? Who is the author of “invented traditions”: the elite or the people, or both together?! In 1983, Colin Williams and Anthony Smith’s joint book - “The National Construction of Social Space” identified eight characteristics that contribute to the formation of the context of nationalism and the geographical environment: 1) Habitat (housing); 2) public culture; 3) scale; 4) location; 5) border; 6) autarky; 7) homeland; 8) nation building. This is the national landscape, the geographical homeland, where all national symbols, “invented traditions” were created.

It was here, in the Georgian “habitat” and natural environment, that the “taste and smell of the motherland” was created, which was scattered in the common ethnic space until the era of nationalism. “Georgian Cuisine” became the “smell and taste of the motherland” after the era of nationalism. And today it is part of the great narrative of the Georgian nation, which, along with other “invented traditions”, the nation needs to be a nation.

Nationalism imposed a high duty of nationality on the nation, and the nation carries the symbols of the nation with due respect - including the national cuisine.

[1]"Place of memory" is the term of the French historian Pierre Nora;

[2] connective structure - the term of the German Professor  Jan Assmann;

[3] The invention of Tradition- the term by Eric Hobsbawm,Cambridge University Press, 1992;

[4]Anderson, Benedict R. O'G. Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London. 1991.

[5]Eric Hobsbawm & Terence Ranger, The Invention of Tradition, Cambridge University Press, 1983.

[6]Emile Durkheim, Henri Bergson, Maurice Halbwachs, Paul Riker, Roger Bastide, René Girard, Pierre Nora and others.

[7] Jan and Aleida Assmann, Harald Welzer.

[8] This term is used in  the multivolume Discourses of Collective Identity in Central and Southeast Europe (1779-1145) and is cited in the book: Nino Chikovani, Irakli Chkhaidze, IvaneTsereteli, Davit Matsaberidze, KetevanKakitelashvili, Narratives of Identity in Georgia: At the Beginnings of the Multi-Ethnic Georgian Nation (1860-1918), Tbilisi, 2014.

[9]ЦатурянРузанна, Заворачивать в виноградные листья или заполнять? Кавказская борьба за национальную кухню/ https://www.opendemocracy.net/ru/kulinarnaya-voina-armenia-azerbaijan/ნანახია: 02.05.2022;

[10] ibid: www.opendemocracy.net/ru/kulinarnaya-voina-armenia-azerbaijan/ნანახია: 02.05.2022;

[11] ibid: www.opendemocracy.net/ru/kulinarnaya-voina-armenia-azerbaijan/has seen 02.05.2022;

[12] The famous SvanianKubdar is known as "Kubdar" in Upper Svaneti, and "Kuptar", "Kuptian" in Lower Svaneti.

[13] Nino Chikovani, Irakli Chkhaidze, IvaneTsereteli, Davit Matsaberidze, KetevanKakitelashvili, Narratives of Identity in Georgia: At the Beginnings of the Multi-Ethnic Georgian Nation (1860-1918), Tbilisi, 2014, pp 9-16 (in Georgian Language).

[14]DeSoucey Michaela, Gastronationalism: Food Traditions and Authenticity Politics in the European Union, 2010; 75; 432 American Sociological Review Michaela De Soucey uses the term "gastronationalism" in two regional conference presentations from a public address by Swart, William J. See also: Swart, William J. 2000. "You Are What You Eat: National Identity and the Politics of Food Production/Distribution." Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Sociological Society, Chicago, IL. The term Gastronationalism is also used, according to Cassel's Slang Dictionary. It is often used to differentiate national identities by insulting food preferences. For example, the dispute between the UK and France over British beef, after France illegally maintained an import ban that the rest of the EU lifted three years ago. This fact led to the name "rosbif" to refer to the British, at the same time as "frog" was used to insult the French.

[15]Nugent, P., Do Nations Have Stomachs? Food, Drink and Imagined Community in Africa, Africa Spectrum,Vol. 45, No. 3. 2010.

[16] This refers to BarbareJorjadze's book;

[17]Sastsivi and Khachauri are the Georgian national Dishes.

[18]The characters of Georgian National Fairy Tales.

[19]Yesim Zaim, How national is food culture? A case study of regional food practices in Turkey, https://www.mediamatic.net/en/page/379045/how-national-is-food-culture, retreived: 02.07.2022;

[20] Gigi Tevzadze, from the book “Enchantment": https://burusi.wordpress.com/2010/06/24/gigi-tevzadze-5/retrieved: 22.05.2022;

[21]Bendedict Anderson, Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London, Moscow, Kanon-press, 2001,in Russian Language;

[22] Gigi Tevzadze, from the book “Enchantment":https://burusi.wordpress.com/2010/06/24/gigi-tevzadze-5/retrieved : 22.05.2022;

[23] Барт , Р., Мифологии.  Академичсемкий Проект. Москва., 2008;

[24] The oldest Kvevri and carbonized wheat grains in the territory of Georgia are approximately 8000 years old.

[25] A list of oldest cookbooks is referenced from: https://theculturetrip.com/europe/articles/the-10-oldest-cookbooks-in-the-world/has seen: 22.05.2022;

[26] Article retrieved from Auguste Escoffier School of Culinary Arts page: https://www.escoffier.edu/blog/world-food-drink/french-cooking-how-and-why-french-cuisine-came-to-rule-the-world/ has seen: 02.05.2022

[27]130 years later, in 1785, the word "restaurant" appeared, a Parisian butcher named Boulanger began to cook meat broth and wrote to the tavern: Venite ad me omnes, qui stomacholaboratis et ego restaurabovos - "Come to me if you have a stomach ache" and will save/restore you". This modern name was born from the verb restaurabo - to restore, to save. Until 1802, "restaurant" was the name of only those food establishments where only meat "restorative" broths were sold (établissement de restaurateur).

[28] “This book is on the preparation of  the best pastries and beverages”, 1818, see the original of the book on the website of the Karchkhadze publishing house. https://karchkhadze.ge/

[29] In "History of Georgia" by SargisKakabadze, the story of the migration of the sons of the last king of Georgia, George XII, to Russia is told in detail. It is also an interesting detail that King George's contemporaries characterized him as a virtuous person, the best Christian and a good student of the Scriptures, but SargisKakabadze writes that "at the same time, he was sick, unusually obese and a heavy eater, which is why his enemies called him a glutton." . p: 244; It can be seen here that food was a cult in King George's house, and it was his son BagratBagrationiwhopublished the first translated recipe book in Georgian in 1818, sent it to Russia andGeorgia.

[30]You can see English version of this Book on publisher’s page: https://rights.sulakauri.ge/services-item/barbare/

[31]Tergdaleuli– in Georgian - „თერგდალეული“ was the name given to those Georgians who were educated in Famous Universities and the way to this Places was across the river Tergi.

[32]Maisuradze Giorgi - "From cultural nation to cultural narcissism" https://www.radiotavisupleba.ge/a/blog-giorgi-maisuradze-cultural-nation/25245883.html/: 02.06.2022;c

[33]Srulisamzareulo (in Georgian - სრულისამზარეულო) – „Complete Cuisine“ by BarbareJorjadze, Publisher: "Sorapani" , Tbilisi 1914;

[34]Lela Gaprindashvili, „BarbareErstavi-Jorjadze“ June 13, 2014 https://feminism-boell.org/ka/2014/06/13/barbare-eristavi-jorjaze. Accessed: 22.06.2022;

[35] Irakli Chkhaidze, "The Modernist Theory of Nationalism and the Georgian National Project ("Tergdaleulebi")/Tbilisi 2009/ p: 54;

[36] Smith E.D. Chosen people, Sacred Sources of National Identity, Oxford University Press, 2003.

[37] Anderson Benedict, Imaginary Societies, translated from English by RusudanGotsiridze, Publishing House - Language and Culture, Tbilisi, 2003; p: 28

[38] See: Zaza Shatirshvili's articles on these topics: http://social-democrats-georgia.blogspot.com/2010/06/blog-post_27.htmlნანახია, 20.05.2022;

[39]Claude Lévi-Strauss ,  Mythologique  Vol 1,  1999. In Russian