Georgia格鲁吉亚

This paper examines the unique cartographic and editorial challenges encountered in producing the first Hebrew edition of the Atlas of Israel (1964), a comprehensive work comprising 102 sheets and 720 large-scale maps. Although modeled on other national atlases, the Israeli atlas diverged significantly due to three primary factors: the country's rapid demographic and cultural transformations, its distinctive geographical position and elongated shape, and the uneven reliability of its documentary base. The most influential factor was the dramatic 600% population increase over two generations, which drove extreme changes in agriculture, economy, communication, and services. To capture this dynamism, the atlas employs time-sequence map series for most topics rather than single static representations, and includes supplementary maps to update content. Geographically, Israel's location on the arid zone boundary creates sharp north-south contrasts, with highly diverse physical, human, and economic elements in the north versus a monotonous south, compounded by varied topography over small altitude ranges. These spatial characteristics demanded specialized cartographic solutions. Finally, the area's political history under Ottoman, British, and Israeli administrations within 50 years resulted in data that differ greatly in coverage and reliability. The paper details how these interrelated problems shaped the atlas's content, design, and production.

A. F. Aslanikashvili; A. B. Baghdasaryan; S. G. Rustamov

The geographical atlases of Armenia (1961), Azerbaijan (1963), and Georgia (1964) were published in the respective national languages and Russian. The scales and formats vary by country: Armenia's atlas is in album form at 1:1,000,000/1:1,500,000, while the other two are in book form at 1:1,500,000/1:2,500,000. The content broadly follows the recommendations of the 1960 Moscow "National Atlas," supplemented with thematic maps reflecting local natural and socio-economic characteristics. Each of the three volumes includes introductory maps, natural conditions and resources, population, national economy, culture and health, and historical maps, comprising 143, 177, and 168 maps respectively, with natural conditions and resources maps accounting for 49%–57% of the total.

Минц, А. А.

This paper provides a critical review of the *Atlas of the Georgian SSR* (1964), a major cartographic work containing over 220 maps and edited by the Vakhushti Institute of Geography. The study systematically examines the atlas’s thematic structure, cartographic design, and scientific accuracy, with particular attention to its physical-geographic section. Organized into seven groups—physical, geology‑geophysics‑geomorphology (31 maps), climate and agroclimate (over 60), hydrology (19), soils‑vegetation‑fauna (21), and landscape‑physiographic regionalization—the atlas is praised for its comprehensiveness and originality. The geological and climatic map series are especially strong, featuring innovative seismic, paleogeographic, speleological, and agroclimatic maps that vividly convey Georgia’s mountainous environment. Despite these merits, several shortcomings are identified. Nomenclatural inconsistencies appear: the Lesser Caucasus is omitted from the physical map; ranges are often labelled by Georgian rather than internationally recognized names (e.g., Meskhetian instead of Adzhar‑Imeretinsky). The term “Marine Plateau” is applied to a folded low‑mountain area, contradicting established geomorphological usage. Climate and soil maps fail to delineate the dry subtropical zone in eastern Georgia, misclassifying these areas. Temporal inconsistencies between the maps of Quaternary deposits and relief age are also noted. These critiques do not detract from the atlas’s overall excellence. It is judged superior to other Soviet‑era republican atlases in thematic breadth and cartographic finesse, and it remains a major contribution to geographical science and regional planning.

Jörg Stadelbauer

This forum contains two book reviews. The first reviews the National Atlas of Georgia (English edition), a comprehensively revised and expanded version of the 2012 Georgian-language atlas, produced through cooperation between Georgian and German geographers. The atlas covers physical geography (geology, geomorphology, climate, hydrology, soils, vegetation), socio-economic themes, history, and religion, incorporating 2014 census data and updates to 2016. The reviewer highlights its value in illustrating Georgia's natural diversity, seismic hazards, climatic boundaries, and soil terminology, while noting limitations such as the relatively small socio-economic map section and insufficient explanations for some symbols. Overall, it is praised as a major cartographic and editorial achievement. The second review examines the Routledge Handbook of Asian Borderlands, which brings together 35 contributions in seven sections. The handbook reflects a paradigm shift in borderland studies from legal-political demarcation towards themes of violence, gender, militarism, mobility, livelihoods, and commodities in post-Cold War globalization. The reviewer commends its conceptual innovation and argues that it offers fresh perspectives on Asian borderlands. Both reviews offer critical assessments of the works' content, contributions, and shortcomings from an academic standpoint.