Atlas of the Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic

Summary

This review evaluates the Atlas of the Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic, published in 1964, with particular attention to its scientific scope, cartographic methods, editorial design, and contribution to Soviet geography and cartography. Containing more than 220 maps, the atlas provides unusually comprehensive coverage of Georgia’s natural environment, population, economy, cultural and medical infrastructure, and history. Its physical-geographical section systematically represents geology, geophysics, geomorphology, climate and agroclimate, hydrology, soils, vegetation, fauna, landscapes, and regionalization. Its socioeconomic section includes detailed maps of population distribution and composition, industry, agriculture, transportation, economic relations, public services, tourism, and territorial economic structure, while the historical series forms a compact atlas of Georgian development from antiquity to the Soviet period. The reviewers especially commend the geological and geomorphological series, climate and agroclimate maps, land-resource mapping, synthetic agricultural map, functional-genetic classification of urban settlements, and maps of archaeological and architectural monuments. Particular methodological value lies in locating phenomena according to their actual spatial distribution rather than relying exclusively on administrative statistics—an approach especially appropriate for Georgia’s highly differentiated mountain environment. The effective combination of analytical and synthetic maps, diverse representational techniques, careful generalization, and high-quality graphic production further strengthens the atlas. Nevertheless, the review identifies several limitations. Geographical names and regional concepts are sometimes inconsistent or geomorphologically questionable; certain geological and geomorphological maps do not correspond fully with one another; and the dry-subtropical character of eastern Georgia is insufficiently represented. The physical-geographical regionalization map lacks explanatory descriptions. Some population-density areas appear weakly justified, relative values are occasionally depicted by inappropriate symbol sizes, and no map of rural settlement types is included. In agricultural mapping, strong background coloring obscures dot patterns, livestock dots are distributed by administrative unit rather than actual grazing areas, and some thematic maps contain inconsistent boundaries. Industrial reconstruction is shown without quantitative scale, transportation maps omit freight flows, and the atlas lacks synthetic maps of internal economic regions. Despite these shortcomings, the atlas is judged a major scholarly achievement. Its breadth, depth, methodological variety, and cartographic and printing quality complete the system of comprehensive scientific-reference atlases for Soviet Transcaucasia and constitute an important contribution by Georgian scholarship to regional geography and thematic cartography.