The subject of approach to mental heritage of ethnical minority of Tbilisi has always been important for the politics of “The Association of Georgian Art Men”.

It’s worth mentioning that the society of ethnical minority in Tbilisi showed with its works that the assault made in scientific literature in the period of Communism regarding the self isolation of this ethnical organization had absolutely no basis. During the board meetings of “The Association of Georgian Art Men” the problems of non Georgian painters were always discussed with great attention. The materials discovered by me in the museum archives of Georgia and Armenia make clear that in the period of the first revolution and after that , there were many forms of Georgian – Armenian cultural communications in Tbilisi. Earlier there were founded the Armenian House of Art “Haiartun” in 1921 and “The Association of Armenian Artists” in 1916 in Tbilisi. In the board of this organization there were painters: Gigo Sherbabchian, Akof Akofian, Vladimer Sureninants,
Edishe Tatevosian, Vano khojabegov and writer Aleksandre Shirvanzade. After four years “The Association of Armenian Artists” joined and functioned as a subsection of The House of Armenian Art “Hairatun”, which was founded in 1921. Besides this subsection there were the sections of literature, theatre and music in “Haiartun”, in their performances the members of “the Association of Georgian Art Men” used to take an active part. It’s mentionable that, the structure of Armenian art house “Hairatun” was based on the temporary commissariat of Armenian cultural buildings “Haikult”, about which nothing is written in the scientific literature. The main mission of this organization was coordination of the business of Armenian cultural organizations in Georgia. This fact opposes the opinion spread in scientific literature, that “Hairatun” was the only Armenian cultural union in Tbilisi in the XX century. Among the members of the board of “Hairatun” were progressively thinking, creative Armenians. For them, like for their colleagues from “The Association of Georgian Art Men” Chauvinism and narrow Nationalism were absolutely unacceptable. Considering the discovered materials, we can conclude, that the strategy of above mentioned organizations in Tbilisi in the first half on the XX century was based on presentation of their own national identity on the one hand and representing their ability of plural and successful cultural integration on the other hand.