Journal of Historical Geography of the Ancient World
6/2000
Stuttgart
Franz Steiner Verlag
2001
p. 177
Giorgi
Leon Kavtaradze, Tbilisi
CAUCASICA II*
THE GEORGIAN CHRONICLES AND THE RAISON D'ČTRE
OF THE
If in the physical world the
process of emergence, growth and decomposition is submitted to a strictly fixed
order, one part of the same world, the social life and its components, among
them of such a complicated nature as a state, are also exposed to the regular
circle of formation and development. As soon as mankind entered the rather
complicated stage of social life, more and more it tried to perceive the
character of the changes due to the flow of time. This had a practical meaning:
the attempts to find the sense in the development of society was one of the
main questions for the inquisitive mind of man; understanding this process it
would be more possible to anticipate the future. After the Classical
(Graeco-Roman) times a particularly great interest in this problem emerged
during the last two centuries. The breakdown of the Communist system gave to
the scientists of countries, belonging to this system, the possibility of using
such ideas of our century which are far away from the dogmas of Marxism-Leninism
and which sometimes were already rather out of date in other parts of the
world.
One of the most prominent
authors of this century whose heritage was studied in the communistic countries
only in the negative sense is Arnold Toynbee. His understanding of the
historical development was based on the conclusion that the process of the
creation of civilisation, in the broadest meaning of this term, was connected
with the reaction, Response, which
was given to the society by the stimulus, Challenge,
initiated in the natural or social environment. In his opinion, this model of Challenge-and-Response is as much in
accordance with the emergence and development of civilisation as the
environmental pressure becomes more important (of course untill it will not
reach a certain limit). The stimulus created by external human environment are
of two types: of a sudden blow and of a continuous pressure. After having
received the stimulus of blow, the society is either annihilated, what happened
rather seldom, or meets the heavy blow with redoubled moral strength and
____________________________________
* An article published in 1996 (Kavtaradze, G.
L. Probleme der historischen Geographie
Anatoliens und Transkaukasiens im ersten Jahrtausend v. Chr. in: Orbis
Terrarum 2, 1996) is considered as ‘Caucasica I’ though it did not have that heading at the time of
its publication.
I owe a debt of gratitude to
Professor Eckart Olshausen for his insightful suggestions as to my work and for
his proposal to write this article for ‘Orbis
Terrarum’ and to Dr. Gisela Burger who improved upon the phraseology and
helped me constantly.
178 Giorgi
Leon Kavtaradze
vigour; so, the society reacts
to the heavy blow by an incredible outburst of purposeful energy.[1]
There are many such examples
in the history of the medieval
In the case of A. Toynbee's
second type of stimulus, the impact takes the form of a continuous pressure. In
terms of political geography, the peoples, states and cities exposed to such a
pressure belong for the most part to the general category of marches (boundary zones between
different "civilisations"). As one of the most impressive examples of
such a phenomenon, A. Toynbee considers the fact of the creation of the united
commonwealth of Poland and Lithuania - Rech
Pospolita by the Lublin treaty 1569 as a counter-stroke to the advance of
the newly formed Russian state which pushed back the eastern frontier of
Lithuania, formerly east of Smolensk, to a line running west of Polotsk on the
Dvina. So, Rech Pospolita gained a
new function - and, by it, a new vitality - as one of the marches of the Western world against a new pressure from
179 Caucasica
II
The political history of the
Georgian state, like of other Transcaucasian counries, was predetermined by the
geographical disposition of
By the statement of W. E. D.
Allen and P. Muratoff, the Great Caucasian mountainous chain, one of the most
important watershed system of the world, barred the descent of the Eurasiatic
nomads into the civilised lands of the
1 The
Problem of Authenticity
of Old Georgian
Chronicles
The historical value of the
old corpus of Georgian writings known under the name of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“ [The Life (i.e. History) of K'art'li (
180 Giorgi
Leon Kavtaradze
caused a great contradiction
of judgements.[9] This corpus consists of thirteen distincts texts written between the
ninth and fourteenth centuries.[10] The canonized text of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“ was fixed by the
commission appointed by King Vaxtang VI in the beginning of the eighteenth
century.[11]
In the widespread opinion
among scholars, it is rather difficult to discern by the content of the early
medieval Georgian and Armenian chronicles what is the creation of the chronists
and what the reflection of the historical reality; strict historical facts are
often intermingled with mythical ones, though investigations revealed a number
of coincidences with other sources historically known, among them by authors of
the Classical period. The results of recent archaeological researches also
prooved their trustworthiness. Therefore „K’art’lis
C’xovreba“ is generally considered as a chronicle which arises quite a lot
of enigmatic questions for historians, but which represents at the same time a
significant source for them.[12]
The earliest manuscripts of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“, The Queen Anne codex and The Queen Mary variant which survived,
belong to the fifteenth (between 1479 and 1495) and seventeenth (between 1638
and 1645) centuries respectively.[13] But the Armenian translation of „K’art’lis
C’xovreba“, an abbreviated rendering of the original[14] in which some new,
specifically Armenian, material was included and translated into classical
Armenian by an unknown cleric already in the twelfth century,[15] is known by
181 Caucasica II
the manuscript which belongs
to the thirteenth century.[16] In the view of St. Rapp, the
creation of the Armenian adaptation of „K’art’lis
C’xovreba“ which perhaps was already written in the first half of the
twelfth century, was caused by the political situation of the epoch when, in
the course of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, Georgia emerged as a
formidable empire, absorbing a great part of Armenia, Northern Caucasia and
districts in Northern Iran and Eastern Anatolia.[17]
The first part of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“, the chronicle: Life (i.e. History) of the Kings, and of the Kings, and of the
Original Patriarchs and Tribes of K'art'li , or in the abbreviated form: The Life of
the Kings (C'xovreba Mep'et'a),
is attributed to the clerical author of the eleventh century, Leonti Mroveli,
Archbishop of Ruisi, but there are indications that in reality Mroveli had only
compiled or rewritten the older texts.[18] According to St. Rapp, internal criteria - which strongly urge a ca. 800
date for The Life of the Kings - and
the establishment of Leonti Mroveli's floruit in the eleventh century together
disqualify Leonti to be the original author; he, as the archbishop of Ruisi,
could have presided over a major re-edition of the initial section of the text
adding to it Biblical elements or could have sanctioned its edition.[19] In the opinion of some
specialists, though Leonti Mroveli is the author of this part, he lived in
reality in the eighth century, and the inscription of 1066, attributed to the
person with the same name, must be explained by the homonymy of several bishops
occupying at different times the same See.[20]
The
Martyrdom of King Archil II, King of K'art'li, the fourth book of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“ tells in its final
parts that: "this book History of
Georgians down to Vaxtang was composed at various times. From King Vaxtang
down to here it was composed by Juansher Juansheriani, husband of a niece of St
Archil" (I, 248)[21] what testifies that the text ascribed to Leonti Mroveli does not belong
to the one and the same author. In the same part of The Martyrdom of King Archil, we have an indication that additions
were made in formerly existing texts: "After
this generations still to come will write down (events) as they see
them..." (I, 248).[22] The Armenian translation of „K’art’lis
C’xovreba“ does not know such an author. „K’art’lis C’xovreba“ was only known in Armenian as The History of the Georgians ("Patmut'iwn Vrac'"), though A.
Tiroyean, the editor of its "
The
Life of the Kings consists of three main parts:
The
description of the oldest period of history until Alexander the Great's times,
influenced by the Holy Scriptures, especially in its attempt to attach the
local eponymous genealogies to the Tabula Popularum of Genesis;[26]
The
story of the legendary invasion of the
The
History of the Conversion of K'art'li.
The last two are connected
with "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay"
(the "Conversion of K'art'li"). St. Rapp considers The History of the Conversion of K'art'li
as a hagiographical embelishment of a brief Conversion
of Kartli of the seventh century, only
in the eleventh century joined to The
Life of the Kings.[27]
According to St. Rapp, the
medieval texts of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“
can be divided into two groups representing distinct periods of Georgian
historiographical evolution: pre-Bagratid and Bagratid.[28] In his opinion, the internal evidence of The Life of the Kings (which in reality terminates in the eve of
king Mirian's Conversion to Christianity)
and The Life of King Vaxtang
Gorgasali dates their composition between ca. 795 and 813 and must be
assigned to ca. 800.[29] St. Rapp attributes the emergence of local histories to the period of interregnum in
The very strong Armenophile
tendencies reflected by The Life of the
Kings are hardly imaginable to have been expressed after the first quarter
of the eighth century or after the unprecedented aggravation of the
Armeno-Georgian religious relations which were already rather tense from the
early seventh century when the Georgians finally accepted Orthodoxy as a result
of the growing Persian influence on the monophysitic Armenian church,[31] and such
tendencies are even more improbable in the epoch of the obvious political
hegemony of the Georgian political formations in the tenth-eleventh centuries.[32] Also the fact of
the absence of the term Ap'xazet'i
(Abkhazia) in the text, used
already from the beginning of the eighth century to designate the western part
of Georgia instead of Egrisi, should
indicate the early eighth century as the latest possible date for the earliest
parts of the text in discussion.[33] It must also be taken into consideration that in the text of The Life of the Kings there was nothing
immediately borrowed from The History of the Armenians by Movses
Xorenac'i, the text of which must be dated to the early eighth century, though
numerous coincidences exist without any doubt. This fact is explained by the
possible use of one and the same Armenian oral and written sources in both cases.[34]
The scepticism concerning „K’art’lis C’xovreba“ changed much after
the discovery of the two Shatberdi and Chelishi manuscripts (palimpsests) of "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay" in
1888 and 1903, which belong to the late tenth (973) and fourteenth-fifteenth
centuries, respectively.
The text of "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay" is
included in „K’art’lis C’xovreba“,
but at the same time the version preserved in the latter differs from both Shatberdi
and Chelishi redactions and testifies to the existence of its more archaic
redaction. The list of kings of „K’art’lis
C’xovreba“ is nearly identical with the list used in "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay" and receives therefore the same
confirmation by the data of foreign sources contemporaneous with the events
mentioned as the latter (see below).[35]
Two unknown manuscripts
of "Mok'c'evay
K'art'lisay" were recently discovered on the Mt. Sinai in the St.
Catherine's monastery, together with more than a hundred of other Georgian
manuscripts dated mainly to the ninth-tenth centuries. The first one is without
a date, but paleographically there is no doubt that it precedes the Shatberdi
manuscript. As the text of the second one begins almost precisely from the place
where it ends in the first manuscript and because the donator of this
manuscript is a certain Ioane, the same person who donated quite another
manuscript to St. Saba monastery in the late ninth century, it must be dated to
the very beginning of the tenth century. This manuscript offers much better
readings than the Shatberdi and Chelishi redactions. These two facts, as to Z.
Alexidze, the investigator of the Mt.
Sinai recension, suggests that
we are faced with the protoredaction of
"Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay", used by Leonti Mroveli.[36]
Though the scholars assign the
compilation of "Mok'c'evay
K'art'lisay" to different periods from the fourth to the ninth
century, most of them believe that it had a place in the seventh[37] or ninth
centuries. "Mok'c'evay
K'art'lisay" consists of two main parts: the Chronicle describing the history of Georgia from the beginning to
the middle of the seventh century (663), the time of the rule of Step'anos II (the time of the
invasion of Caucasia by Heraclius, the Emperor of Byzantine) and The Life of St Nino. The first part of
the narrative is unified and regular, the language, if taken from the military
field, is rich of short expressions and sentences of laconic brevity; the
historical events, the live and actions of Erismt'avars
(rulers) and Cat'olici (patriarchs)
of
The fact that the main text of
"Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay"
records the history of the country only until the end of the first half of the
seventh century and that the list of the persons living from that time till the
ninth century appears only in the appendix, should testify that the chronicle
was written in the middle of the seventh century and redacted in the early
tenth century. In the opinion of M. Tarchnishvili, the chronicle was presumably
used by the Armenian author, P'ilon Tirakac'i, in 686 or 696.[39] The existence of at least four significantly different redactions in the
beginning of the tenth century, spread not only in Georgia but also far away
from its frontiers, induces Z. Alexidze to support the opinion that the
creation of the archetype of the narrative must be put back well before the
ninth century; at the same time he considers the Chronicle and The Life of St.
Nina as separate compositions, thematically combined with each other later
on, perhaps in the ninth century.[40] It was suggested that the text of "Mok'c'evay
K'art'lisay" was compiled at that time,
though its sources go back to
written material at least as early as the seventh century, judging by the use
of the x- prefix, the interpolation
of conjunctions between prefixes and verbs and the use of a pre-Arab lexicon.[41]
Even in the addition to the
Shatberdi manuscript of the second part of the tenth century there is an
indication of an older age of "Mok'c'evay
K'art'lisay", telling us that
"this book ("Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay")
was found after many years of its creation".[42] We must be of course very cautious about the reliability of this
information. As to P. Ingorokva, the narrative of the christened Jewish
clerical author, Abiatar from Mcxet'a (the old capital of
The lists of kings of the Chronicle of "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay" are very brief and
chronologically defective, though they are supported by foreign sources; thus,
in the opinion of researchers, some sixteen of the thirty-seven kings from the
fourth century B.C. to the sixth century A.D.,
are known from such sources as Tacitus, Appian, Cassius Dio, Ammianus
Marcellinus, Aelius Spartianus, Procopius and the Syriac Life of St. Peter the Iberian as well as epigraphical data of the
fifth-century and they were together with some events orally transmitted
through several centuries in a remarkably accurate fashion. At the same time,
the story about the immigration of Kartvelians from their old homeland and the
subsequent establishment of the Iberian monarchy as well as informations about
the historical geography of
sources and traditions.[47] St. Rapp does not
even exclude the possibilty of the existence of a local written sources of
early Georgian history, now lost.[48] It was recently correctly
noticed that without attempt to use Georgian historical records and to
reconcile them with Classical evidence, the arguments of some scholars working
in the Georgian historiography are weakened.[49]
The initial part of "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay", the Chronicle
of the Conversion of Iberia (K'art'li),
containing the story of the invasion of Iberia (K'art'li) by Alexander the Great and the foundation of the first
East Georgian state differs most of all in comparison with other parts of the
text of "Mok'c'evay
K'art'lisay" included in „K’art’lis
C’xovreba“. Therefore the source of „K’art’lis
C’xovreba“, very different from the initial parts of the above four
manuscripts of Mok'c'evay
K'art'lisay", should be considered as a quite independent version or
even as a compilation of Leonti Mroveli who, together with the text of "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay",
presumably used data still unknown. Nevertheless, in any case the similarity of
The Life of the Kings, the first part
of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“, to the Chronicle of the Conversion of Iberia (K'art'li) is so great that the problem of its authenticity, as a
result of parallel studies of these two chronicles, should not be considered
anymore as an urgent subject of contemporary researches. These both chronicles
reveal traces not only of the creativity of the folk, but also the undoubtedly imprint
of the repeated literary redactions.[50]
Beside the many other examples
of the coincidence between the two chronicles importance must be attached to
the information about Alexander the Great of Macedon, to whom the emergence of
the Eastern Georgian, Iberian kingdom, is ascribed.
2 Apocryphal
Alexander the Great
and the Emergence
of the Iberian
Kingdom
As to "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay", Alexander the Great, after
having arrived in K'art'li (
188 Giorgi
Leon Kavtaradze
Nobody knows with certainty
what was implied in Arian K'art'li of
"Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay"
and where it was located[51] as the "Mok'c'evay
K'art'lisay" does not give any explanation. But because by the data of The Life of the Kings, a new ruler of Iberia, king P'arnavas, after
the defeat of Azon, made a raid on
the frontier-province of Greeks with the aim to ruin the frontier regions of
Pontus and to conquer Klarjeti,[52]
Arian K'art'li of the Georgian chronicle,
by the generally accepted opinion, must be located southwest of modern Georgia,
in the historical south-west Georgia, in the northeastern part of modern
Turkey.[53] This suggestion can be proved by the Anatolian
character of the pantheon of deities of the Iberian royal court. In this
connection certain attention must be also paid to the information by Menander
the Guardsman of the late sixth century, namely that
By the statement of the
Georgian historian G. Melikishvili, this information of the Georgian chronicle
reveals the active role which, according to Leonti Mroveli, the kingdom of
P'arnavas (Iberia) played in the relationship between Greece and Assyria (i.e. between the Pontic and Seleucid
kingdoms) which he consideres as a prove that the territory of the Iberians was
extended to the southwestern direction in the third century B.C.[55] In the view of C. Toumanoff, the informations of the Classical authors
about Seleucus I's project to dig a channel between the Black and the Caspian
seas,[56]
as well as the Caspian expedition of Patrocles in 283/282 B.C.,[57]
seem to corroborate the Georgian tradition about the Seleucid suzerainty over
the early Iberian monarchy.[58] St. Rapp underlines as well the connection between the Georgian
tradition and the aspiration of Alexander's Hellenistic successors,
the Seleucids, to monopolize
the strategic trade routes extending through
As to The Life of the Kings, the name of Alexander the Great's close
supporter is Azon and different from "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay" he
was installed by Alexander as a patrician:[60] "Alexander conquered all
K'art'li... and left over them (the Iberians - G.K.) as patrician one Azon by
name, son of Iaredos, a relative of his from the land of Macedon; and gave him 100,000 men from the land of Rome,
which is called P'rotat'os. The P'rotat'oselni were strong and courageos
men, who were oppressing the
This information of The Life of the Kings is taken without
any doubt from the "Mok'c'evay
K'art'lisay", where, in contrast to the first one, the name of
Alexander's lieutenant is Azo and not
Azon, and who besides did not take
Roman soldiers, but his fellow
countrymen and the idols Gaci and Ga with him from his old homeland, Arian K'art'li, to Mcxet'a (320).[63]
By the words of Movses
Xorenac'i, author of The History of the
Armenians: "...opposite the
Caucasus Mountain as governor of the north he (king Valarshak of Armenia - G.K.) appointed... great and powerful family and called the title of their
principality the bdeashkh of the Gugarats'ik; these were descended from
Mihrdat, the satrap of Darius, whom Alexander brought and left as prince over
the captives from among the Iberian peoples that Nebuchadnezzar had brought, as
to Abydenus narrates in these terms: ""the powerful Nebuchadnezzar,
who was mightier than Heracles, gathering an army, came and attacked the land
of the Libyans and Iberians. Breaking their resistence, he subdued them. And
part of them he led away and settled on the
right-hand
side of the
In an another extract of The History of the Armenians Movses
informed us that the king Artashes, grandson of Valarshak and son of Arshak,
gave his sister Artasham "as wife to
a certain Mithridates, great bdeashkh of Georgia, who was from the seed of
Mithridates, satrap of Darius, whom Alexander had set over the prisoners from
Iberia... And he entrusted him with the government of the northern mountains
and the
Because of these data from the
Georgian and Armenian chronicles the opinion prevails in the Georgian
historiography that the origin of the Iberian kingdom must
be connected with the
expansion of Hellenistic states of
Though The History of the Armenians, similar to the Georgian annals, attributes the foundation of the Iberian kingdom
to Alexander the Great, it is evident that Alexander never marched towards the
At the same time, certain
events seem to have really taken place in
The information of Strabo that
Menon was sent by Alexander with soldiers to Syspiritis near Caballa, where
gold mines were,[79] in correlation with his
remark that eastern Iberians are known under the same name as the western
Iberians because of the golden mines in both countries,[80]
obviously does not concern the Central Transcaucasian homeland of Iberians, but
the southwesternmost part of their country,
Speri (modern Ispir in Turkey). From the tenth
century church of Xaxuli (modern Turkish Haho), situated immediately east from
Speri in the western part of the ancient Georgian province Tao, the heavenly
representation of this pagan king is known, dated back to the fourteenth
century. Alexander of Great was so much worshipped in
The desire of the local rulers
to connect their own aims with the interests of Alexander the Great and to use
his power for their realisation, is reflected in The Campaign of Alexander by Flavius Arrian, the Roman writer and
politician of the second century A.D.,
According to him, in 329-328 B.C. the king of Central Asian "Chorasmieans", Pharasmanes, came to Alexander on the bank of the Central Asian
river Oxes (modern Amu Daria) and told him that he lived in the neighbourhood
of the Colchians and Amazonians and
offered his help if Alexander wished to conquer these tribes who lived in the
region extended to the Pontus Euxinus (i.e.
Black Sea).[81]
As I tried to point out in
another place, this information must be connected with the data of Armenian and
Georgian chronicles concerning the dependance of the Iberian ruler on Alexander
the Great.[82] If on the one hand, the king of Chorasmieans, Pharasmanes, mentioned by Arrian,
expected Alexander's help against his neighbours - Colchians and Amazoneans - on the other hand, by the
information of Georgian and Armenian chronicles, Alexander the Great after his
arrival in K'art'li (Iberia)
installed his lieutenant as a ruler. As P'arnavas of The Life of the Kings, after
the defeat of Azon (Azo), accomplished his raid to the
south-west towards East Anatolia, and Mithridates
(Mihrdat) of The History of the Armenians seems to be a representative of the Mithridatides
dynasty of Pontus, I thought that exactly in this region - the northeastern
part of Anatolia - not only Arian
K'art'li mentioned in the Georgian chronicle but also the country of Pharasmanes, the enemy of the Colchians and Amazoneans, the name of whose country
was presumably mixed up with the designation of the country in Central Asia - Chorasmii could be possible to locate.
In connection with the problem
concerned, we paid attention to Strabo's information that Armenians enlarged their lands by cutting off
from the Iberians the slopes of
assumed that if in the text of
The Campaign of Alexander by Flavius
Arrian, under the name of the Chorasmiean's
king Pharasmanes the ruler of the
Iberian province of Chorzene was
meant, then the above information of Arrian and the information of the Georgian
chronicle about the son of the king of Arian
K'art'li, Azo, who became king in
Mcxet'a with the help of Alexander the Great, must have one and the same
source.
We can only guess that the
events of the late fourth - early third centuries B.C. were somehow connected
with the processes which caused the emergence of the Iberian kingdom. That is
quite clear from the whole context of the early history of
The need to adjust Azo's personality of the "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay" to
the concept of The Life of the Kings
about the authochtonity of Georgians and their first native king P'arnavaz
induced, at the first glance, the author (or redactor) of this chronicle to
replace Azo by Azon, "the Macedonian", and his (Azo's) countrymen from Arian
K'art'li by Azon's supporter
"Roman soldiers", p'rotat'oseans.[85] In the opinion of G. Melikishvili, it
is possible that cycles about Azo (Mihrdat of The History of the Armenians) and P'arnavas existed initially
separately or that they are even versions of the one and the same story about
the origin of the Iberian kingdom and that they were obviously united in the
later literary version by the author of The
Life of the Kings.[86] But if the story about hundred thousand (?!- G.K.) Roman soldiers who were taken by Azon with him, a part of whom was later
assimilated in the local population,[87]
was wholly invented by the chronist and added to the story of "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay" about
the first Iberian king, Azo, as it
was assumed,[88]
for which reason they are called in the chronicle „p'rotat'oselni?“[89] what in Georgian means people of „P'rotat'o“ - p'rotat'oseans. Nobody knows exactly
what this term („p'rotat'oselni“)
means or where their (the people of „P'rotat'o“) homeland was located.
In the view of Y. Gagoshidze,
the term „p'rotat'oselni“ could be
derived from the Greek prόtaktoV with the meaning
of advanced,
in a first line, though the author of „K’art’lis
C’xovreba“ used it without understanding its sense.[90] It was recently
also assumed that the term „p'rotat'oselni“
must be taken from the Greek πρό-τασις, πρό-τασσω with the meaning
of advance-guard, used to designate
the Greek military corps of Alexander the Great's time.[91]
The proposed explanation of
the term p'rotat'oseans by the Greek
word πρότασις, πρότασσω would become more credible if
we would take into account the Attic form of the same Greek word: πρόταττω, more similar to
the Georgian term - >>P'rotat'os.
As it is known, the Attic dialect was used by Macedonians already from the time
of Alexander's father Phillip II, and widely spread throughout the Hellinistic
world, resulting from the expansion of Alexander's army. As this word means in
Greek a "place or post in
front", "stand before one
so as to protect",[92] it even expresses the historical destination of the Iberian kingdom and,
generally, of the whole Transcaucasian
area which, being located immediately south from the Caucasian Gates ( i.e. pillars of Alexander)
and representing a part of one and the same Hellenistic world, defended the
Mediterranean - Near Eastern οίκουμένη, the civilized
world of common interests, from the invasion of the
northern nomadic tribes.
But if the term p'rotadoseans of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“ is now connected with the alleged expansion
of the Macedonian army, it is evident that Alexander never marched towards the
In this connection we must pay
attention to the statement of The Life of
the Kings, that means that Alexander the Great, invading
the legendary image of the
great king are represented on the state emblem of the Republic of Georgia and
under the hoofs of the horse of White Giorgi (the image of Georgia) the
Caucasian mountains are depicted instead of the dragon of St.George's icon - a
symbol of natural challenge of the country, a symbol of the connection of its
destiny with one of the main markers of the geographical and political division
of the world.
3 The
Role of Caucasian
Passes in the
Early History of
Transcaucasia
In "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay" and The Life of the Kings, we have the description of the invasion of
Georgia by Alexander the Great who saw there horrible barbarians, established
on the Kura river (Mtkvari - in
Georgian) and along its northern tributaries (flowing down from the mountains
of the Great Caucasian Ridge), people who were called by Georgians "Bun-Turks and Kipchaks".[96]
Alexander was astonished because no other people acted in such a disgusting way
as they did. But they had strong towns and were fearless warriors. In Georgian
annals the characterization of these barbarians is picturesquely expressed,
though by the words of the chronicier: "the description of their way of life is inexpressible".[97]
It seems that the Bun-Turks, whose name is usually
explained as original, fundamental, real Turks or as "Hun-Turks" and whom Alexander
supposedly met in
As only in this part of The Life of the Kings, describing
Alexanders campaign towards the
with earlier and later
northern invaders speaks mainly of Khazars,[100] this fact must be considered as an
additional proof of the borrowing of above part from "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay" or from a third source, common
for both these chronicles, unknown to us.
As Khazars are mentioned in The
Life of the Kings describing events of pre-Alexander time, it becomes
obvious that this ethnonym was used in the conventionl sense and implied
nomadic tribes settled in the
The information about the
building of cities at the entrance to Khazaria seems to be the reflection of
the permanent desire of the Transcaucasian population to fortify the entrances
also at the northern edges of passes leading through the
The
Life of the Kings ascribes the opposition to the Khazar invaders of the
Persian military leader (erist'avi) Ardam: "He came to K'art'li, destroyed all the cities and castles of K'art'li,
and killed as many Xazars as he found in K'art'li" (I, 13).[104] This is asserted
for the epoch earlier than Alexander's fight with Bun-Turks and must therefore be considered as a later addition to
the text comparable with "Mok'c'evay
K'art'lisay".
The
Life of the Kings mentions two routes of the invasion of Transcaucasia
from the north and indicates simultaneously the approximate time of the
creation of the above part of the text
by calling the invaders - "Xazars": "The Xazars knew two roads, namely the Pass of the Sea, Daruband, and
the Pass of the Aragvi, which is the Darial" (I, 14).[105]
Movses Xorenac'i, the author
of The History of the Armenians,
called also the northern tribes, according to the realities of his time, "Khazars" and "Basiliks", who, passing the Daruband Pass ("Chor gate", Derbend), invaded the
right bank of the River Kura: "...the
hosts of the northern peoples united, I mean the Khazars and Basilik', and passing through the Chor gate
under the leadership of their king, a certain Vnasep Surhap, they crossed to
this side of the River Kura". Valarsh, the king of Armenians at first
won and "pushed them back through
the Chor pass". But the enemy was once again united and Valarsh in the
subsequent battle was killed. His son, Khosrov, "gathered the Armenian army and passed across the great mountain to
exact vengeance for his father's death. Routing those powerful nations with
sword and lance, he took hostage one out of every hundred of all their active
men, and as a token of his own authority he set up a stele with an inscription
in Greek so that it would be clear that he owed allegiance to the Romans"
(II, 65).[106]
This information must be
connected with the data given in The
History of the Armenians (§ 19) by Agathangelos, an author supposedly of
the late fifth century A.D., about
the population of northern origin who penetrated Transcaucasia from Dariali as
well as from Derbend Gate (stronghold of
the Chor), but following the invitation by the Armenian king: "...Khosrov king of Armenia began to raise
forces and assemble an army. He gathered the armies of the Albanians and the
Georgians, opened the gates of the Alans and the stronghold of the Chor; he
brought through the army of the Huns in order to attack Persian territory and invade
Asorestan as far as the gates of Ctesiphon". The scale and importance
of such possible northern invasions
become obvious by the following words:
"He ravaged the whole country, ruining the populous cities and properous
towns. He left all the inhabited land devasted and plundered. He attempted to
eradicate, destroy completely, extirpate, and overthrow the Persian kingdom and
aimed at abolishing its civilization".[107]
The same story is as well
reflected in The Life of the Kings:
"Kosaro was king in
The policy of Armenians, as
well as Georgians, towards northerners was ambivalent: if, on the one hand, it
was necessary to defend the Caucasian passes from them, on the other hand it
was a big temptation to use their forces against their own southern enemies.
The Armenian king Trdat, according to Movses Xorenac'i, "with all the Armenians descended into the
plain of Gargar and met northern /people/ in battle... in pursuit, chased them
as far as the land of the Huns... Trdat took hostages from them according to
ancestral custom and returned. Thus he brought together all the north, raised
many troops, and bringing them together marched to
But generally the interests of
Georgian, Armenian and Persian monarchs were united in the defence of the
Derbend Gate from the penetration of the northerners. The Life of the Kings mentions, that king Mirian who afterwards
became the first Christian king of
"He began to wage war on the Xazars, and fought continuously. Sometimes
the Leks defected from Mirian; and whenever they brought down the Xazars to
help them, Mirian would encounter them in Heret'i or Movakan, and there they
fought a battle. On other occasions the Durjuks and Didos joined forces and
brought down the Xazars.Then they fought battles, and never did the Xazars win.
Mirian was always victorious. Such was the frequent result of battle with the
Xazars. He made most of his expeditions to Daruband. For the Xazars would come
and besiege Daruband in order to capture it and open the broad pass, from where
they began to invade
The
Life of King Vaxtang Gorgasali shows the importance of the Derbend Gate for
the operations of the northern tribes in Iberia: "When Vaxt'ang [the proper form is Vaxtang - G.K.] was ten years old,
innumerable Ossete troops came down and ravaged K'art'li, from the source of
the Mtkuari [the Kura river - G.K.] as far as Xunan. They devastated the
plains, but left untouched the fortified cities, except for Kasp [the
proper form is Kaspi - G.K.]... and went through the pass of Daruband
because its inhabitants gave them passage. Then they returned victorious to
As to an information by Movses
about much earlier times when Arshak, the son of Valarshak, ruled over
"summoned there (below of Kol, cf. II, 9 - G.K.) the barbarous foreign race that inhabited
the northern plain and the foothills of the great Caucasus Mountain and the vales
or long and deep valleys that descend from the mountain on the south to the
great plain. He ordered them to cast off their banditry and of assassinations
and to become subject to royal commands and taxes..." (II, 6).[117]
It is obvious that Movses
meant the same Bulgars in this
connection. In the above paragraph[118]
Movses Xorenac'i considers the upper Basiani (the territory between the upper
flows of the
As we have seen, Movses refers
several times to the barbarous races north of the
For the advanced societies of
the Near East the fear of the invasion of northern tribes, "sinful tribes of Gog and Magog", from the Central
Eurasia, at the time of the gradual increase of their activity, mainly that of
the Hunns, became more and more dangerous. The Huns, as to Ammianus
Marcellinus, "burn with an infinite
thrist for gold".[120]
By the characterization of the emperor of Byzans, Constantine II
Porphyrogenetus, "all the tribes of
the North have as it were implanted in them by nature, a ravening greed for
money, never satiated, and so they demand everything and hanker after
everything and have desires that know no limit or circumscription".
Already in the third century B.C. a Chinese chronicle records that "the Barbarians of the West and of the
North are ravenous wolves who cannot be satiated".
In his book, A History of the Georgian People,
published 68 years ago and which as a epigraph has the phrase from the Decline of the West of Oswald Spengler,
namely that "poetry and historical
study are akin", W. E. D. Allen underlines the big difference between
the areas north and south of the Caucasian
mountains.[121]
We can sum up that
same as Inner Asia) and as its
periphery, were situated in the area exposed to the influences of A. Toynbee's
second type of stimulus created by human environment - the stimulus of continuous
external prressure. Such a position of the
At the time of the fall of the
It deserves to be mentioned
that by the information of Pliny the timber logs of the Caucasian Gate were covered by iron sheets.[123]
The so-called Caspian Gate was mainly characterized by
the name of the
effective before the fifth
century A.D. because of the earlier
much higher sea level of the
However, the Iberian state
suceeded not only in defending the Caucasian
Gate but also in using this "Gate"
for its own strategical aims: in case of necessity to mass the additional
military forces from the north against Georgia's southern enemies. Already in
connection with the Persian counter-offensive of legendary Ardam against the Khazars,
The Life of the Kings reports about
the collaboration of the
Pliny makes a very important
remark, namely, that opposite the Caucasian gates the Iberian city Harmastus
(the same as the old capital of
was to bar the route for
innumerable tribes from the North coming down along the Tergi (Terek) and
Aragvi ravines from the Caucasian Gate
or Dariali. It is interesting to notice that in the opinion of W. E. D. Allen,
the next capital of
The strategical importance of
the central part of Iberia - K'art'li -
is underlined in connection with the story of the Georgian's attempt to gain
the support of the Persian king of the late third century: "...the Persian king asked about the city of Mc'xet'a, and they
[the Georgians - G.K.] described its size and strength and its
proximity to the Xazars and Ossetes...[135] This well pleased the Persian king and he accepted
the Georgians' request, since he himself decided it was best to appoint his own
son as king of Mc'xet'a [king Mirian - G.K.]. For of all the cities of
The importance of the
Caucasian passes were crucial for the Arabs, too. Their aspiration to gain the
control over these passes are depicted in Georgian annals. The Life of King Vaxtang Gorgasali informs us about the destruction
of the cities and the subjection of nearly the whole the
Much more complicated is the
information of The Book of K'art'li
narrating about the unordinary measures of the Arab military leader in
connection with the northern enemies of the Arabs: "He [Turk Bugha, the Arab military leader - >G.K.] opened the
* * *
Regardless of the fact that we
haven't any proof of the invasion of
4 The
Although Georgian and Armenian
chronicles attribute the foundation of the Iberian kingdom to the apocryphal
invasion of Alexander the Great, two moments are not quite understandable in
the text of The Life of the Kings
from the point of view of the above discussed identification of the p'rotat'oseans with the Greek military
corps of Alexander's time.[140]
Firstly, it is not at all
understandable that Azon's troops are
designated as Roman soldiers. For the
author of The Life of the Kings as
well as for the whole Georgian literature of the Early Middle Age, the
distinction between the Romans (Hromi)
and Greeks (Berdzeni) is very well
known. In this connection the text of an Armenian translation of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“ is of a certain
interest:
"Over the country he [Alexander - G.K.]
appointed as patrician, which is "elder" Macedonian called Azon, and
gave him 100,000 soldiers, who were the guard, very brave and strong fighters.
They were seriously oppresing the Greeks in their own country, therefore he
removed them from there and handed them over to Azon" (20).[141] It seems that the Armenian translator, feeling the logical discrepancy
of the Georgian text by which the Roman troops of an unimaginable quantity
(100,000 soldiers) were included in Alexander's army, identifed them with the
Greeks; there is no one word about their belonging to the Romans, though the
Armenian text knows the designation "Romans". At the same time the
word „p'rotat'oselni“ is translated
into Armenian as „p'rotitosik“ =
"guard". In the opinion of R. W. Thompson, the word cannot derive
from Greek πρότακτος as suggested by A. Tiroyean, the editor of
the 1884 (Venice) edition of the Armenian text, since p' renders φ, and not π (as in patrik, see above).[142] H. Acharean connects this
word with Greek φρούρα (with the meaning,
"guard") or with a word derived
from it: φρούρητός, which would give
in Armenian p'rotitosik because of
the similarity of Armenian letters ւ, ր on the one hand,
and տ on the other, and
conjectures the correction of „p'rotitosik“
(փրոտիտոսիկ) to
„p'roiritosik“
(փրուրիտոսիկ),
but
it does not explain the term „p'rotat'oselni“
(ფროტათოსელნი) used in the
original Georgian text.[143]
Secondly, the term πρότασσω or πρόταττω with its meaning,
indicating its defensive character (see above), hardly corresponds to the
political situation of Alexander the Great's time as well as to the time of his
immediate successors, and is even more in accordance with the period of the
Roman empire. As it is known,
After the death of Mithridates
VI Eupator and the capitulation of the king of
Also by the words of Dio the
fortress (Acropolis, citadel of Armaz) had been built in order to guard the
pass at the narrowest point where the Cyrus flows on the one side and the
At the same time,
The strategical importance of
After the King of Iberia,
Artag, and the chief of the Albanian tribes, Orois, had been defeated in
Pompey's campaign, they were declared by the Romans as their "friends and
allies";[153] but this "friendship"
did not last a long time. Already in 36 B.C., at the time of Marcus Antonius'
(83-30 B.C.) Parthian expedition, Roman troops with Canidius (Publius Canidius
Crassus) were sent against the Iberians[154]
and Albanians.[155] The victory over
the Iberian king Pharnabaz (Pharnavaz II) and the Albanian king Zober and their
attraction to the unity and "friendship" with Romans encouraged
Antonius.[156] The reason for this
encouragement was probably the role of the mountain passes through the
The folllowing hundred years
was the time of the strengthening of the Iberian kingdom. The Iberians
succeeded not only in expelling the Parthians from
At the end of his reign (in
66-67) Nero (54-68) initiated a grandiose plan for a new Caucasian expedition.[159]
It is not excluded that, at this time, it was intended to cross the
the course of their recent campaigns.[162] In such a case,
Th. Mommsen’s conjecture of the Albanians
of the above fragment of Tacitus to the Alans
would have only the factual indication of the real state of affairs.[163] In Tacitus’
information, citing the words of the Iberian king, Pharasmanes I, there was a
war among Iberia and Albania in the middle of the first century A.D.[164]
Pharasmanes, who showed himself as a skillfull diplomat, seems ultimately to
have succeeded in the deterioration of the Roman-Albanian relations, forcing
the latters to change their pro-Roman orientation because of his aggressive
policy towards them.
If we would also take into
account the fact that relations of Rome with Parthia simultaneously improved as
never before, then an explanation of the expectation of a threat coming from
the north for the eastern regions of the empire in the nearest future and,
correspondingly, Nero's preventing measures would be most plausible. Whatever
may have been the nature of the projects conceived and then abandoned by Nero,
they would have more likely involved an action together with
The Caspian gates, and on th'
Alaunian tribes
In Persian tracts to wander,
nor compelled
To seek for shelter Babylonian
walls"
(The Civil War, VIII, 222-225).[166]
The Alans, striving for the
lands south of the
But there are also some facts
reflecting a more complicated picture of this period: the armed confrontation
between Romans and Parthians.[171] It seems that the relations
between
in contrast to Nero,[172] was not eager to
have common defensive projects with the Parthians and prefered to have plans
not only independent of them, but even predeterminated by the need to overcome
the traditional, though not always quite evident, Parthian opposition in the
east. Everything was done by Romans to create a solid barrier to eastern
enemies and to encourage a pro-Roman orientation of
At the same time, the
concentration of the Roman forces on the eastern frontier and even outside of
their genuine outlines, must be explained not only by the need to defend
eastern provinces, but also in the context of their main political task to have
an advantage as to the intensity of the pressure on the Caucasus - on the area
which had a key-importance because of immense military resources beyond of it,
potentially ready for the involvement. These forces could anytime threaten the
geopolitical status quo in the Near
Eastern - Eastern Mediterranean area. The control of the Caucasian passes would
have given the most favourable opportunity for the foundation of Pax Romana in the
The manipultion of such hardly
manageable forces as the northern nomads was an extremely difficult and
dangerous task and required the involvement of the Roman military detachments
in the area. The army units were needed
in
A.D. 77, the date of
the displacement of the Roman legion, Legio XVI Flavia Firma, from
of the date of the invasion of
Alans, and, at the same time, of the Roman counter-offensive. This date finds a
confirmation and can be even fixed more precisely by the time when the Romans
helped the Iberians to fortify Harmosike (in Georgian - Armazc'ixe)[176] which was afforded in
75, independently of the fact whether it
took place as a precaution against attacks of enemies or only as a consequence
of their attacks.[177] As to H. Halfmann, this fact
means that in 75 Roman troops and engineers were already in
The fact that the stone
inscription was found 7 km south from Mc’xet’a and not in the neighbourhood of
the Dariali pass must of course by no means exclude the possibility that the
defensive constructions were built against Alans, as it was by M. Heil
suggested.[181] As to A. Bosworth, the
diplomatic language of the inscription must not obscure the fact that Roman
military troops were stationed in Iberia and that Nero's plans which were
frustrated by the outbreak of a revolt in the west, have been adopted and
largely fulfilled by Flavian emperors. In his opinion, Roman troops in
Two kings of K'art'li, ruling simultaneously, Azorki in Armazi and Armazeli in Mc'xet'a, are placed by the
Georgian annals at the time
approximately contemporary to Mithridates of the inscription. Therefore
scholars think that it was Mithridates II of Iberia who was mentioned by both these
names, Azorki and Armazeli. As to G. Melikishvili, it is
possible that some Iberian kings have had two names, one for a local use and a
second, Mithridates, which
represented the dynastic name of the Iberian kings and had been known already
from The History of Armenians of
Movses Xorenac'i, was used only in the outside world.[184] Armazeli in Georgian means "of Armazi", and it seems
possible that it was not at all the name of a king, but a territorial epithet
applied to the name Azorki who, as to
the text, ruled in Armazi. The name Azorki,
on its part, is undoubtedly related with the name of the first Iberian king, Azo, who (alike Azorki?) is also known, from The
History of Armenians, as Mihrdat/Mithridates.[185]
In the view of Toumanoff, this polyonomy
must have caused the anonymous author of the source of Leonti Mroveli to split
one king into two, connected, at first, with a brief division of the country
between two kings, one a Roman and the
other one an Iranian vassal in the years 370-378, and, secondly, by the
existence of the institution of the vitaxa
of Iberia in the mid-first - mid-second century.[186] The Life of the King dates this division to the
first century A.D.: "In the first year of his [Aderki,
king of
our
Lord Jesus Christ in
Flavius Josephus' information
about the invasion of the Alans in
As to the camping-place on the
river Iori, cf. Priscus of Panium[190]
and John Lydus[191]
mentioning together with the Caspian
Gates the fortress of Iouroeipaach
or Biraparach, which can be possibly
located on the lower flow of the Iori in Udabno where recently a big
fortificated complex dated from the Late Bronze Age till the Early Medieval
times was detected. The above-mentioned
Abazuk of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“ (in
Armenian translation - Anbazuk), one of the two brother-kings of
Ossetes, seems to be the same as
Ambazoukes of The History of Wars of
Procopius of Caesarea (c. 500-562+).
Ambazoukes, a friend of the Romans and of the emperor Anastasius I (c. 430-518), though a Hun by blood,
wanted to give the stronghold at the
Caspian Gate which he owned to the Romans[192] before the war with Persia began in
502. The "division" in two
of his name in „K’art’lis C’xovreba“,
Bazuk and Abazuk, was caused
probably by the association with biblical Gog
and Magog.
This story of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“ about the joint
Iberian - North Caucasian campaign in Armenia presumably dated in the second
half of the first century A.D. is
also by Movses Xorenac'i vividly described in The History of Armenians, though he considers only half of Georgia
as allies of the Alans (cf. above, about the partition of the Iberian kingdom
in two parts p. 212): "At that time
Alans, having united with all the mountain peoples and having brought over to
their side also half the land of Georgia, spread out over our land in a great
host. Artashes also gathered the mass of his troops, and there was war between
these two valiant nations skilled in archery. The nation of the Alans gave a
little ground, passed over the great river
In the opinion of specialists
of Caucasian history, these data of the Georgian and Armenian chronicles are
comparable with the above information of Flavius Josephus, and thus they use
them as a proof of the Caucasian route of the invasion through the
"When
I come to begin my story, I consider worthy of lamentation those narrators, I
mean the Hellenes Homer and Aristobulus, and also the Hebrew Josephus. The
first of these composed the accounts of the Trojans and of Achilles - how
Agamemnon and Priam, or Achilles and Hector, or again Odysseus and Orestes
fought, and who defeated whom. The second described the victories of Alexander,
his valiant exploits and triumphs. While the third put in writing the
affliction wrought on his fellow-countrymen by Vespasian and Titus" (I, 342).[195]
Movses Xorenac'i has retained
the version of the story of Flavius Josephus given in the Josephus’ following
fragment about the rescue of the Armenian king, Tiridates, from the Alanian
captivity: "Now Tiridates was king
of that country, who met them, and fought them, but had like to have been taken
alive in the battle; for a certain man threw a net over him from a great
distance, and had soon drawn him to him, unless he had immediately cut the cord
with his sword, and ran away, and prevented it. So the Alans, being still more
provoked by this sight, laid waste the country, and drove a great multitude of
the men, and a great quantity of the other prey... along with them, and then retreated back to their own country".[196]
Though, in The History of Armenians
this narrative about king Tiridates (Trdat) is connected with the invasion of
another northern people, the people of Basilk's,
and, at the same time, the final result of the fight is described in a quite
different way as if the author, having before him Josephus’ text, would have
changed it with intention: "King
Trdat with all the Armenian descended into the plain of Gargar and met the
northern [people] in battle... the king of the Basilk approached the king [Trdat
- G.KK.]. Drawing from his horse's armor a strap of sinew wound around with
leather and forcefully throwing it from behind, he skillfully caught him on the
left shoulder and the right armpit, for he [Trdat] had raised his arm to strike
someone with his sword; he was, however, wearing chain armor, which arrows
could not pierce. And because he was unable to dislodge the giant [Trdat] with
his hand, he grasped his horse's chest. The giant was quick, not so much to
spur his horse as to grasp the sinew in his left hand and draw it to himself
with a violent pull. He agilely wielded his two-edged sword and cut his
opponent through the middle, also splitting the head and reins of his horse.
The whole army, seeing their king and
general cut in half by such a fearsome arm, turned in flight. Trdat, in
pursuit, chased them as far as the land of the Huns" (II, 85).[197]
„K’art’lis
C’xovreba“ also mentions the fact of the strengthening of the castles at the time
of Azork and Armazeli, but only after the defeat of the northern coalition by
the Armenians: "Both Georgian kings wounded, took refuge in
Mc'xet'a. Then Sumbat [the leader of the Armenians - >>G.K.] victoriously
entered K'art'li. He ravaged K'art'li, whatever he found outside the castles
and cities. But he did not attack the fortified cities because he was not
prepared, owing to the suddenness of
his invasion... Now these kings of Georgia, Arzok and Armazel, in the hardness
of their hearts were not afraid, but fortified their castles and
cities..." (I, 47).[198] At the same time we are not quite sure if the fortification of the walls
of Armazc'ixe by Vespasian was intended exclusively against the Alans. As it is
known, the stone with Vespasian's inscription has been found near the railway
bridge close to the Hydroelectrical station on the right side of the
The presence of the Roman
troops in central and eastern parts of
Range and the
XII
Fulminata was also mentioned on a stone, now lost, of the left bank of the
The existence of the Latin and
Greek inscriptions in the territories between the Caspian Sea and Iberia is
presumably connected with the aforementioned Roman and Iberian common
strategical interests in the controlling of the passes located in this area.The
extention of domains of the Iberian king to the east, what was simultaneously
the guarantee of the expansion of their political power and the achievement of
the superiority over their eastern adversaries, would be of course in the
interest of the Roman empire. Therefore the participation of the detachment of Legio XII Fulminata in the campaign of
the Iberian king against
A bilingual epitaph of a mid-second century A.D. found in Mc'xet'a in Greek and
Aramaic, gives an additional proof about the long-term stay of the Romans or
their descendants in
"I
am Serapit, daughter of Zewah the younger, pitiax of Parsman the king, wife of
Yodmangan - both victorious and having wrought many victories as chief of the
court of Hsepharnug the king - son of Agrippa, chief of the court of Parsman
the king."[212] The Greek text
contains the entire form of the name of Serapit's father-in-law: Publicius
Agrippa. In the opinion of A. Bosworth, this personality cannot have been an
Iberian noble who received the Roman citizenship because grants to
distinguished members of client kingdoms would have been conferred by the
emperor, and we should expect the recipient to bear an imperial nomen, though his son, Yodmangan, seems
to have been already a wholly Iberian.[213]
Only one Roman name, Flavius
Dades, depicted on a silver bowl, is attested in the Iberian royal house. It
seems that its owner was a native whose ancestors was given the citizenship by
a Flavian emperor as a privilege. Though the Flavians have been more active in
The evidence about the
interrelations between and Rome under Trajan is represented by the epitaph
found in Rome where the brother of the Iberian king, Mithridates,
Amasaspus, killed in Nisibis by
Parthians (A.D. 115), is mentioned: "The illustrious king's scion,
Amazaspus, the brother of King Mithridates, whose native land lies by the
Caspian Gates, Iberian, son of Iberian, is buried here by the sacred city which
Nicator built around the olive-nurturing stream of Mygdon. He died companion to
the Ausonian leader, going for the lord to Parthian battle... " It was assumed that Amazaspus was at the head of
the Iberian forces coming to Nisibis to fight for Trajan.[215] The friendly
relations between
All these above facts indicate
not only the existence of the close collaboration between the Romans and the
Iberians founded on the coincidence of their strategical interests in the
Caucasia, but also the real integration of some Romans in the kingdom of
Iberia.
The Roman involvement in
All these data give us the
possibility to assume that the story about the p'rotadosean followers of Azon, the ruler of
As the word „p'rotadoselni“ of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“[220] cannot be derived from Greek πρότακτος - Georgian p'
renders Greek φ, not π ( see above), it
would not be less plausible to propose the connection of the word „p'rotado-selni“, which means people of P'rotado,with the name of M.
Hirrius Fronto, a presumable commander of an eastern expedition under Vespasian ( see above); at
the same time it could be a possible proof that Fronto received such an
appointment. It is known that, even if military units had a permanent title,
they could still, for convenience
or for flattery, be called by
the name of their commander.[221] Maybe the term under discussion designating initially the army unit
under the command of Hirrius Fronto, was afterwards understood (already before
the compilation of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“)
as the Greek expression, πρόταττω, with the meaning of "place or post in front" (see above).[222] At the same time, the title
of Azon of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“ - the commander of the p’rotat’oseans - „patrik“,[223]
translated by R. W. Thomson as patrician,[224] is maybe the reflection of Hirrius Fronto’s title adlectio inter patricios, received by
him in 73/74,[225] i.e. immediately before
his eastern expedition.
If we take into account the
traditional opposition of Albanians to Romans and the location of the
inscriptions of Beyük Dash and Karjagino (see above) which mentioned Legio XII Fulminata in the former
Albanian territory, then the campaign of Hirrius Fronto’s expedition against
Albanians, and consequently the completion of the important lacuna in the Saepinum inscription[226] by adding Albanos to the end (exercit]us qui in A[lbanos), would become most plausible.[227]
* * *
From the viewpoint of the
Roman - Iberian relations the character of the supreme deity of Iberia, Armazi, who, though obviously of
Anatolian provenance, reveales some traits typical of the most important god of
the Roman empire - Juppiter Optimus
Maximus Dolichenus should be taken into account. At the same time, The Life of the Kings considers Armazi
as the Persian name of king P'arnavaz:
"This
same P'arnavaz made a great idol named after himself. This is Armazi, because
P'arnavaz was called Armaz in Persian. He erected this idol Armazi at the
entrance to K'art'li, and from then on it was called Armazi because of idol.
And he celebrated a great feast of dedication for the idol which had been
erected" (I, 25).[228] In the view of C. Toumanoff, this information reflects the fact that
P'arnavaz's name is derived from Avest.
xarenahvant with the meaning "brilliant", "splendid"[229] or from the
epithets attributed to the Hittite version of Tešub and that, in spite of the unquestionably lunar character of Armaz and his connections with the
Hittite lunar god - Arma -,[230] by no means it
should have been needed to exclude his essential identity with Teshub, because,
as it is known, storm, rain and fertility - Tešubs
domain - can be easily associated with the lunar religion, while the bull's
horns also serve to symbolize the moon.[231]
In the text of The Conversion of K'art'li by Nino, the
second part of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“, the
Iberian idol, Armazi, is described as
"...a man of bronze standing;
attached to his body was a golden suit of chain-armour, on his head a strong
helmet; for eyes he had emeralds and berils, in his hands he held a sabre
glittering like lightning, and it turned in his hands... Furthermore, to his
right was a man of gold whose name was Gac'i; and to his left a man of silver
whose name was Gaim. These the people of K'art'li regarded as gods" (I, 89-90).[232] The same text in the Armenian
adaptation is represented in the following way: "..a man attired in a bronze breast-plate and a golden helmet, the two
eyes adorned with emeralds and beryl, holding a sword in his hand like a rod of
lightning. He moved this, striking terror into the crowd... To his right stood
a gold image named Gac', and to his left the silver image called Gayim"
(47).[233]
The "rod of
lightnings", "swords" and „armours“ („flaky-armours“ or
"breast-plates"), together with the Phrygian cap, are attributes of the god of Roman militaries (and
not only of them) Iuppiter Optimus
Maximus Dolichenus who had, like Armazi,
his rootes in the god of storm of the Hittite religious pantheon. As soon as Iuppiter Dolichenus, the Syrian god Hadad of Doliche (modern Dülük, north of
Especially interesting is the
description of Armazi’s headdress as
a „stabile coul or hood“ (ჩაბალახი მყარი)
and not as a „strong hamlet“ as translated in English (see above, p. 225[235]).
The adjective „stabile“ (მყარი)
would be expected in connection with Armazi’s
headdress if it represented something like a Phrygian cap because a coul of the Georgian type is in reality a
quite „unstabile“ piece of a cloth with a triangulary shaped upper part (like a
Phrygian cup) and long sleeves
surrounding breast and back. The gold
and silver images to the right and left hand of Armazi, Gac'i and Gaym („Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay“ cites Gac’i
and Ga), perhaps representations of
solar and lunar deities, have parallels in Apollo
Citharoedus and Diana Lucifera, deities
of the Dolichenian pantheon. It was suggested that Diana was the lunar partner of a solar Apollo and that they had a permanent precise doctrinal position in
the theology of Iuppiter Dolichenus.[236] The distinctly portrayed subordinate position of the deities of sun and
moon to Iuppiter Dolichenus is to be
detected on the bronze slab from Doliche where both these deities are placed
beneath the feet of Iuppiter Dolichenus
who was surrounded by stars. The frequent representation of other deities
together with Iuppiter Dolichenus,
not only of Appolo and Diana, but also of Hercules and Minerva, Isis and Serapis, the divine twins, dioscuri
- Casstor and Pollux, Juno Dolichena
and Asclepius etc. was one of the
most peculiar manifestations of the cult of Dolichenus.[237] According to the
scholars, Gac'i and Ga (Gaym)
correspond to the Anatolian deities Attis
and Kibela, while the second god of
the Iberian religious hierarchy, Zaden,
was nobody else than Šandaš/Šantaš,
the Hittite divinity of vegetation and fertility.[238] It seems that the
Iberian religious pantheon consisted mainly of the deities of the syncretic
nature and that the characteristics of these deities were afterwards enriched
by some traits typical of the Roman period. The intensity of the Roman
involvement in
To sum up, we should assume as
to the problem of the implication of the information about the first Iberian
king, Azo or Mihrdat/Mithridates, of the Georgian and Armenian chronicles, that
certain events seem to have really taken place
in
On the other hand, the
narrative about the first Iberian king in the story of Azon of „K’art’lis C’xovreba“, the Macedonian
conqueror of Iberia, seems to have been mixed with a still unknown source which
was dedicated to Roman activities, presumably to those of the Flavian period (A.D. 69-96) in Central Transcaucasia.
The control of the Caucasian passes could give the most favourable opportunity
of the preservation of Pax Romana in
the
The quite obvious tendency of The Life of the Kings,expressed in
opposition to the mixing of the Georgians with the Persians, should be
considered as an indirect proof of such a possibility. The chronicle preserved
the attitude of Georgian aristocracy with regard to the forced invitation of
the Persian king's son in his position of a king of Iberia (the future king
Mirian) and of the husband of princess Abeshura - the sole representative of
the Georgian royal family: "...we
shall ask him [the Persian king -
G.K.] to preserve the religion of our
fathers, and request no mixing of
Persians with us, and that our treatment be as nobility..." otherwise "...death is better for us than the
sight of such a state of affairs. We would occupy our castles and cities, and
perish all together" (I, 63).[239]
It must be also taken into
consideration that nearly in whole the text of The Life of the Kings the tendency of the opposition to the Persian
monarchy is quite obvious. The origin of such feelings after the capitulation
of the Persians to the Arabs in the middle of the seventh century is hardly
imaginable. Even in connection with the constant Arian-Turanian struggle the
sympathy of the Georgian chronicier is on the side of Turks who already before
the time of Alexander arrived in Mc'xet'a searching a refuge after they had
been defeated by the Persians. In his words: "The Turks and Georgians joined in a willing alliance. While
waiting for the arrival of the Persians, they fortified the castles and cities.
At that time whoever came from Greek territory for reason of persecution, or
fled from Syria or from Xazaret'i, the Georgians befriended them all for the
sake of their help against the Persians" (I, 15).[240]
The quite obvious opposition
to the eastern political formations and pro-western orientation revealed by the
above mentioned Classical written and epigraphical sources and Georgian
chronicles was a leitmotiv of the whole history of
5 The
Today, after the annihilation
of the communistic system and the crucial changes in most of the parts of
From the point of view of A.
Toynbee's theory of marches, the
situation observed by D. Sinor deserves attention, namely, that the boundaries
of the former Communist countries mainly coincided with the zone of habitation
of the nomad tribes of Inner Asia or, more correctly, Central Eurasia, covering the area from the western boundaries
of Poland and Finland to the Pacific Ocean and from the Northern Ocean to the
Caucasus. This heartland of the huge Eurasian continent - the homeland of the
Iranians, Slavs, Uralians and Sino-Tibetians - was mainly based on
stock-breeding, while the countries of the so-called free-market economy are
located in the Eurasian periphery, in the place of old sedentary civilisations
of Europe, of the Middle East and Southeast and East Asia set up on
agricultural economy. Of the latter a unique combination of cultural features
was characteristic.[241]
But two exceptions are in the
aforementioned scheme,
If we recall the words of D.
Sinor, that "particularly artificial
are distinctions made (between the countries - G.K.) on the basis of, often
ephemerical, political arrangements which are given priority in defining an
area over more lasting, deeply rooted national or cultural traits",[243] it becomes obvious
that the main reason why Transcaucasia was not included in Central Eurasia, but
in its periphery, can be revealed in the long history of this region,
predetermined by the geographical disposition of Transcaucasia south of the
Great Caucasian Ridge.
D. Sinor's assumption
coincides with H. Mackinder's old scheme as to which the Pivot Area comprises the territory of the Russian empire and
Nortern
excluding the regions of
north, west and south of
It seems that because of the
determining role of one of the world's most important mountaneous chains as the
D. Sinor supposes that the
main case of the conflict was not the rivalry between the nomads and sedentary
farmers, but between "haves"
and "have nots", the
conflict thus being economically motivated: one group trying to improve its
living conditions on the expense of the other one; the attacks of outsiders being stopped or
repulsed by insiders. The main reason of this conflict was the absence of
substantial farming caused by a combination of physical-geographical factors of
The picturesque image of the
population of the northern provenance under the name of Qipchaks was retained in the Georgian folk ballad "I Came Across a Qipchak"
which can be considered as dating from the twelfth-thirteenth centuries, the
only period of the residence of the Qipchaks in Georgia, sheltered by the
Georgian king, David the Restorer, and used as mercenaries against the
invasions of Seljuk Turks. The ballad contains such verses:
"I came across a Qipchak,
On the road at the edge of the
Mukhrani,
He asked me for bread and I
fed him bread,
I offered him wheat-flour
bread.
He asked me for meat and I fed
him meat,
I offered him pheasant.
He asked me for wine and I gave
him wine,
I offered him Badaga [boiled
grape-juice] wine.
He asked me for my wife and I
couldn't give her,
...
I cut down horse and
man..."[247]
The provision of food could
avert invasions of the impoverished population and in many occasions even did.
The merits and demerits of providing "foreign aid" for impoverished
nations is nowadays a circumstance which, in the opinion of D. Sinor, must
induce us to view with some indulgence the efforts made by previous populations
to solve an insoluble problem; with the sudden outbursts of activity and lulls,
mostly due to exhaustion, these conflicts have continued until modern times, in
some aspects, perhaps, even to soothing this very days. There was always a need
for a barrier to be erected between two Worlds such as the Greater Wall of
China or
The above scheme, worked out
on the base of the written sources of the Classical and Mediaeval writers, has,
as it was pointed out, parallels in the history of Caucasia, particularly of
Georgia and Armenia.
In the history of the
Mediaeval Transcaucasia the invasions of a certain part of Central Eurasian
population - Turk-Seljuks, Khoresmenians, Mongols, Tatar-hordes of Tamerlan,
herdsmen tribes of Ak-Koinlu and Kara-Koinlu should, at the first glance, be
ascribed to the first model of A.
Toynbee's stimulus which was created by human environment and expressed in the
form of the sudden external blow, but the systematic character of the invasions
of Central Eurasian populations seems to take the form of his second model -
the stimulus of continuous external pressure. In that case the function of the marches, the main decisive factor of
this model, was divided not only between the north and the south but also
between the east and the west. In other words, the main part of these invasions
had taken place not only from the north as it was at earlier times in
connection with other Central Eurasian nomadic tribes, like Cimmerians,
Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans, Huns, Bolgars, Khazars, Ossetians etc., but also
from the south or south-east direction.
The interest of the Near
Eastern-Mediterranean societies in Transcaucasia was inevitable as
Transcaucasia because of its location in the edge of the civilized and
barbarian worlds, was an area of influences of the two opposite models of the
historical development, but
the factor of the Great Caucasian Ridge, as we already underlined, determinated
its destination to be the outpost of the highly developed Eurasian periphery
against Central Eurasia, characterized by a slow rate of development, or in
other words, to be the stronghold of the civilized South and West against the
barbarian North and East.
It seems quite obvious that
there was an interconnection between the formation of the royal power in
Such a destiny of the Georgian
state can be observed in the course of its history. The poem known as The Mourning of the King Heraclus II is
included in the Georgian folk poetry
of the end of the eigtheenth - beginning of the nineteenth century, the time of
the annexation of the East Georgian (K'art'l-Kaxet'ian) kingdom by the Russian
empire. It runs:
"Oh, Georgians, you don't
understand
That your iron gate is opened;
You have no more the king
Heraclus,
Of the house of Bagrationi;
You have no more your banners,
And your canons became silent;
. . .
You mustn't betray one another
Or your enemy will scratch out
your eyes."[252]
In this poem our attention is
attached to the words, "Oh,
Georgians, you don't understand that that your iron gate is opened." From the first glance it is
posible to think that the iron gate was used in the poetry in a transferred
sense, illustrating the decline of power
of the country; but if we recall the fact that the Dariali Pass, crossing the
central part of the Great Caucasian Ridge, was known as the "Iron Gate" at ancient times,
it would be possible that these words reflect the concrete fact of the loss of
one of its function of the Georgian state - the ability to defend its northern
gate - Dariali Pass. Thus the concept of the "
Georgian statehood - the
control of one of the most importaant strategical passes of the world.
This function of the state
seems to have been one of the main decisive factors which challenged the
emergence of Georgian state in the central part of
As we can judge, the above
discussed factors of the geopolitical character not only cause the emergence of
the statehood in
APPENDIX
N. 1: "წიგნი ესე ქართველთა ცხოვრებისა ვიდრე ვახტანგისამდე აღიწერებოდა ჟამითი-ჟამად. ხოლო ვახტანგ მეფისა ვიდრე აქამომდე აღწერა ჯუანშერ ჯუანშერიანმან, ძმისწულის ქმარმან წმიდისა არჩილისმან (I, 248)".
N. 2: "მიერითგან შემდგომი მომავალთა ნათესავთა აღწერონ ვითარცა იხილონ... (I, 248)".
N. 3: "დაიპყრა ალექსანდრე ყოველი ქართლი... და დაუტევა მათ ზედა პატრიკად სახელით აზონ, ძე იარედოსისი, ნათესავი მისი ქუეყანით მაკედონით, და მისცა ასი ათასი კაცი ქუეყანით ჰრომით, რომელსა ჰქჳან ფროტათოს. ესე ფროტათოსელნი იყვნეს კაცნი ძლიერნი და მჴნენი, და ეკირთებოდეს ქუეყანასა ჰრომისასა. და მოიყვანნა ქართლად, მისცა აზონს პატრიკსა. და დაუტევა ქართლს ერისთავად აზონ, და მის თანა სპანი იგი, მპყრობელად ქართლისა (I, 18)".
N. 4: "დაიპყრა ალექსანდრე ყოველი ქართლი, და მოსრნა ყოველნი იგი ნათესავნი აღრეულნი ქართლს მყოფნი, და უცხონი იგი ნათესავნი მოსრნა და დაატყუევნა... და დაუტევნა ნათესავნი ქართლოსიანნი (I, 17)".
N. 5: "და უბრძანა ალექსანდრე აზონს, რათა პატივსცემდნენ მზესა და მთოვარესა და ვარსკულავთა ხუთთა, და ჰმსახურებდენ ღმერთსა უხილავსა, დამბადებელსა ყოვლისასა (I, 18)".
229 Caucasica
II
N. 6: "ხოლო სარკინელთა შესჭირდა, რამეთუ ჰრბძოდა თერთმეტ თუე. იწყეს ფარულად კლდესა კაფა, და განâურიტეს კლდე იგი, რომელი ლბილ იყო და ადვილად საჴურეტელი. და განკრბეს ჴურელსა მას სარკინელნი ღამე, და შეივლტოდეს კავკასიად, და დაუტევეს ცალიერად ქალაქი (I, 18)''.
N. 7: "მას ჟამსა შინა განძლიერდეს ხაზარნი და დაუწყეს ბრძოლად ნათესავთა ლეკისათა და კავკასიოსთა... და ითხოვეს შუელა ხაზართა ზედა. ხოლო შეკრბეს ყოველნი ნათესავნი თარგამოსიანნი, და გარდავლეს მთა კავკასია. და მოტყუენეს ყოველნი საზღვარნი ხაზარეთისანი, და აღაშენნეს ქალაქნი პირსა ხაზარეთისასა, და წარმოვიდეს. ამისსა შემდგომად ხაზართა იჩინეს მეფე, და დაემორჩილნეს ყოველნი ხაზარნი მეფესა მას ჩინებულსა მათსა. და წარმოიძღუანეს იგი და გამოვლეს ზღჳს-კარი, რომელსა აწ ჰქჳან დარუბანდი. ვერ წინააღუდგეს თარგამოსიანნი, რამეთუ იყო სიმრავლე ურიცხჳ ხაზართა, წარტყუენეს ქუეყანა თარგამოსიანთა, და შემუსრნეს ყოველნი ქალაქნი არარატისანი და მასისისანი და ჩრდილოსანი...(I, 11-12)".
N. 8: "წარვიდა ვახტანგ და დადგა თიანეთს. და მუნ მიერთნეს ყოველნი მეფენი კავკასიანნი ორმოცდაათი ათასი
მâედარი. და წარემართა სახელსა ზედა ღმრთისასა, განვლო კარი დარიალანისა. შესლვასა მისსა ოვსეთად იყო ვახტანგ წლისა თექუსმეტისა. მაშინ მეფეთა ოვსეთისათა შეკრიბნეს სპანი მათნი და მოირთეს ძალი ხაზარეთით, და მოეგებნეს მდინარესა ზედა, რომელი განვლის დარიალანსა და ჩავლის ველსა ოვსეთისასა (I, 151)".
N. 9: ''შევიდეს ოვსეთს და მოეგებნეს მეფენი ოვსეთისანი და ყოველნი მთავარნი მათნი, და ვითარცა მონანი
დადგეს წინაშე მისსა. და აღიხუნეს მძევლნი ორთაგანვე, ოვსთა და ყივჩაყთა, და ესრეთ ადვილად შეაერთნა ორნივე ნათესავნი. და ყო შორის მათსა სიყუარული და მშჳდობა ვითარცა ძმათა. და აღიხუნა ციხენი დარიალასა და ყოველთა კართა ოვსეთისათა და კავკასიისა მთისათანი. და შექმნა გზა მშჳდობისა ყივჩაღთათჳს, და გამოიყვანა სიმრავლე ფრიად დიდი (I, 336)''.
N. 10: "მოვიდა ქართლად და შემუსრნა ყოველნი ქალაქნი და ციხენი ქართლისანი. და მოსრა ყოველი რაოდენი ხაზარი პოვა ქართლსა შინა (I, 13)".
N. 11: "და ისწავეს ხაზართა ორნივე ესე გზანი, რომელ არს ზღჳს-კარი დარუბანდი და არაგჳს-კარი, რომელ არს დარიალა (I, 14)".
N. 12: "ხოლო სომხითს მეფე იქმნა კოსარო. და ამან კოსარო მეფემან უწყო ბრძოლად ქასრე მეფესა სპარსთასა, და შეწეოდა მას ასფაგურ, მეფე ქართველთა, და ამან ასფაგურ განუხუნის კარნი კავკასიანთანი და გამოიყვანნის ოვსნი, ლეკნი და ხაზარნი, და მივიდის კოსარო მეფისა თანა სომეხთასა ბრძოლად სპარსთა. და პირველსავე შესვლასა სპარსეთად ეწყო ქასრე, მეფე სპარსთა და აოტეს იგი და მოსრეს სპა მისი. და მიერითგან ვერღარა წინააღუდგა ამათ მეფე იგი სპარსთა, და განამრავლეს შესვლა სპარსეთად და ტყუენვა სპარსეთისა... ვითარ იოტეს სომეხთა და ქართველთა და ჩრდილოსა ნათესავთა მეფე სპარსთა, და განამრავლეს შესვლა სპარსეთს და ოჴრება სპარსეთის; და ვერღარა ოდეს წინააღუდგა მეფე სპარსთა (I, 59-60)".
N. 13: "ამის-ზე გამოგზავნა სპარსთა მეფემან ერისთავი სპითა დიდითა სომეხთა და ქართველთა ხარკისა დადებად. მაშინ სომეხთა მოგზავნეს ვარაზ-ბაქარისსა მოციქული და რქუეს, რათა შეკრბენ და მოირთონ ძალი ბერძენთაგან, და განახუნენ კარნი კავკასიანთანი, და გამოიყვანნეს ოვსნი და ლეკნი, და წინააღუდგენ სპარსთა. და წარჩინებულნი თჳსნიცა ეტყოდეს წინააღდგომასა სპარსთასა (I, 136)".
230 Giorgi
Leon Kavtaradze
N. 14: "და იწყო ბრძოლად ხაზართა, და მარადის ჰბრძოდის: ოდესმე გააგდიან მირიანს ლეკნი და მათ გამოიყვანიან რა ხაზარნი თანაშემწედ მათდა, მიეგების მათ წინა მირიან ჰერეთს ანუ მოვაკანს და მუნ ეწეŐს მათ; და ოდესმე დურძუკთა და დიდოთა მოირთნიან და გამოიყვანიან ხაზარნი, მაშინ ეწყŐს და ვეროდეს სძლეს ხაზართა, და ყოვლადვე მირიან სძლის. და ესრეთ მრავალგზის გადაიâადა წყობა ხაზართა. და უფროსი ლაშქრობა მისი იყვის დარუბანდს. რამეთუ მოვიდიან ხაზარნი და მოადგიან დარუბანდს, რათამცა წარიღეს და განაღეს კარი ფართო, და მუნით იწყეს გასლვად სპარსთა ზედა. ხოლო ოდეს მოვიდიან ხაზარნი დარუბანდს, მაშინ წარვიდის მირიან შუელად დარუბანდისა: ოდესმე უომრად მიჰრიდიან ხაზართა მათ მირიანს, და ოდესმე ბრძოლითა აოტნის (I, 66)".
N. 15: "მუნ ყოველნი დღენი ჩემნი დამიყოფიან ბრძოლასა შინა ხაზართასა, და მრავალგზის სისხლითა ჩემითა დამიცავს სპარსეთი ხაზართაგან (I, 67)".
16: "მაშინ ვითარ იქმნა ვახტანგ წლისა ათისა, გარდამოვიდეს ოვსნი სპანი ურიცხუნი და მოტყუენეს ქართლი
თავითგან მტკურისათ ვიდრე ხუნანამდე, და მოაოâრნეს ველნი არამედ ციხე-ქალაქნი დაურჩეს, თŐნიერ კასპისა... და განვლეს კარი დარუბანდისა, რამეთუ თŐთ გზა სცეს დარუბანდელთა, და შევიდეს ოვსეთს გამარჯუებულნი (I, 145-146)".
N. 17: ამან არდამ ერისთავმან აღაშენა ქალაქი ზღŐს-კარს, და უწოდა სახელი დარუბანდი, რომელი ითარგმანების "დაâშა კარი (I, 13)".
N. 18: "ეზრახნეს ოვსთა, გარდამოიყვანეს ოვსნი და პოვეს ერისთავი სპარსთა ველსა გარე, და კნისობდა, და მოკლეს იგი. და რომელ პოვეს სპარსი, ყოველი მოსწყŐდეს ოვსთა და ქართველთა, და განთავისუფლდეს ქართველნი, ხოლო რანი და ჰერეთი დარჩა სპარსთა (I, 13-14)".
N. 19: "ხოლო გამოიკითხა სპარსთა მეფემან პირველად ქალაქისა მცხეთისა, და უთხრეს სივრცე და სიმაგრე მისი და მახლობელობა ხაზართა და ოვსთა... კეთილად სთნდა სპარსთა მეფესა, და შეიწყნარა ვედრება ქართველთა. რამეთუ თŐთცა უკუთესად გამოარჩია მცხეთას დასუმა ძისა მისისა მეფედ. რამეთუ ყოველთა ქალაქთა სომხითისა და ქართლისათა, რანისა და მის კერძოთა, ყოვლისა უფროსად და უმაგრესად გამოარჩია და მახლობელად ჩრდილოთა მტერთა, რათა ჰბრძოდეს მათ მუნით და იპყრობდეს ყოველთა კავკასიანთა. აღუსრულა ყოველი იგი სათხოველი ქართველთა, და მისცა ყოველსა ზედა ფიცი და აღთქმა... და მისცა ქართლი, სომხითი, რანი, მოვაკანი და ჰერეთი... (I, 63-64)".
N. 20: "და ყოველნი მთავარნი და პატიახშნი, ნათესავნი ერისთავთა და წარჩინებულთანი შეიმეოტნეს კავკასიად, და დაიმალნეს ტყეთა და ღრეთა. და მოვლო ყრუმან ყოველი კავკასია, და დაიპყრა კარი დარიელისა და დარუბანდისა, და შემუსრნა ყოველნი ქალაქნი და უმრავლესნი ციხენი ყოველთა საზღვართა ქართლისათა (I, 234)".
N. 21: ''განაღო კარი დარუბანდისა და გამოიყვანნა ხაზარნი, სახლი სამასი, და დასხნა იგინი შანქორს. დარიალანით გამოიყვანნა ოვსნი ვითარ სახლი ასი, და დასხნა იგინი დმანისს, და ენება ზაფხულის შესვლა ოვსეთად. ხოლო ამირ-მუმნმან ვითარ ცნა, ვითარმედ ხაზართა, ტომთა მისთა, ზრახავს, მოუვლინა ბუღას, რათა დაუტეოს ქართლი ჰუმედს, ხალილის ძესა (I, 256-257)".
231 Caucasica
II
N. 22: "და მეფობდეს შემდგომად მისსა ძენი მისნი. ხოლო ამათსა მეფობასა უესპასიანოს ჰრომთა კეისარმან წარმოტყუენა იერუსალემი, და მუნით ოტებულნი ურიანი მოვიდეს მცხეთას და დასხდეს ძუელთავე ურიათა თანა, რომელთა თანა ერთნეს შვილნი ბარაბასნი, რომელი ჯვარცმასა უფლისასა განუტევეს ურიათა უფლისა ჩუენისა იესოს წილ (I, 44)".
N. 23: "ვითარცა იტყŐს ესაია: აღიღე და წარწყმიდე ყოველი წული მათი, ტიტოს და სპასიანოსის მიერ. (I, 164)".
N. 24: "ხოლო პირველსავე წელსა მეფობისა მისისა იშვა უფალი ჩუენი იესო ქრისტე, ბეთლემს ურიასტანისასა (I, 35)".
N. 25: "ხოლო ამას ადერკის ესხნეს ორნი ძენი, რომელთა ერქუა სახელად ერთსა ბარტომ და მეორესა ქართამ. და ამათ განუყო ყოველი ქუეყანა თŐსი: მისცა ქალაქი მცხეთა და ქუეყანა მტკუარსა შიდა ქართლი, მუხნარით კერძი ქალაქი და ყოველი ქართლი მტკუარსა ჩრდილოეთი, ჰერეთითგან ვიდრე თავადმდე ქართლისა და ეგრისისა - ესე ყოველი მისცა ბარტომს ძესა თŐსსა, ხოლო არმაზით კერძი ქალაქი, მტკუარსა სამხრით ქართლი, ხუნანითგან ვიდრე თავადმდე მტკურისა, და კლარჯეთი ყოველი მისცა ქართამს ძესა თŐსსა. და მოკუდა ადერკი (I, 43)."
N. 26: "ესე მეფენი არმაზელ და აზორკ იყვნეს კაცნი მâნენი და შემმართებელნი. და შეითქუნეს ესენი და განიზრახეს ძიება საზღვართა ქართლისათა... ამათ მეფეთა ქართლისათა აზორკ და არმაზელ მოუწოდეს ოვსთა და ლეკთა, და გარდამოიყვანნეს ოვსთა მეფენი, ძმანი ორნი გოლიათნი, სახელით ბაზუკ და აბაზუკ, სპითა ოვსეთისათა. და მათ გარდამოიტანნეს თანა პაჭანიკნი და ჯიქნი. და გარდამოვიდა მეფე ლეკთა და გარდამოიტანნა დურძუკნი და დიდონი. და ამათ მეფეთა ქართლისათა შემოკრიბნეს სპანი თŐსნი და შეკრბა ესე ყოველი სიმრავლე ურიცხŐ. და სიმარჯŐთ ფარულად შეკრბეს, ვიდრე შეკრბებოდეს სპანი სომეხთანი. და შევიდეს ესენი სომხითს და უგრძნეულად წარმოსტყუენეს შირაკუანი და ვანანდი ბაგრევანამდე და ბასიანამდე, და შეიქცეს და ჩატყუენეს დაშტი ვიდრე ნახჭევანამდე, და აღიღეს ტყუე და ნატყუენავი ურიცხŐ, და აღივსნეს ყოვლითავე ხუასტაგითა, და გამოვლეს გზა ფარისოსისა... ესე ყოველნი ჩრდილონი განსრულ იყვნეს მტკუარსა და მისრულ იყვნეს კამბეჩოანს, და დაებანაკათ იორსა ზედა, და განიყოფდეს ტყუესა და ნატყუენავსა (I, 45-46)".
N. 27: ''ხოლო ამად რა თხრობად მოვიწიე, ვაებისა ღირსად შევრაცხენ დიდნი იგი და სახელოვანნი
გამომეტყუელნი, ვიტყŐ უკუე უმიროსსა და არისტოვლის ელინთა, ხოლო იოსიპოს ებრაელსა, რომელთაგანმან ერთმან ტროადელთა და აქეველთანი შეამკვნა თხრობანი, თუ ვითარ აღამემნონ და პრიამოს, ანუ აქილევი და ეკტორი, მერმეცა ოდისეოს და ორესტესი ეკუეთნეს, და ვინ ვის მძლე ექმნა; და მეორემან ალექსანდრესნი წარმოთქუნა მძლეობანი, სიმâნენი და ძლევა-შემოსილობანი; ხოლო მესამემან ვესპასიანე ტიტოÎს-მიერნი მეტომეთა თŐსთა-ზედანი ჭირნი მისცნა აღწერასა (I, 342)".
N. 28: "...შემოიხუეწნეს ორნივე მეფენი ქართლისანი მცხეთას, მოწყლულნი. მაშინ სუმბატ გამარჯუებული შემოვიდა ქართლად, და მოაოხრა ქართლი, რომელი პოვა ციხეთა და ქალაქთა გარე; ხოლო ციხე-ქალაქთა არა ჰბრძოდა, რამეთუ არა მზა იყო მსწრაფლ გამოსვლისაგან... ხოლო მეფენი ესე ქართლისანი, არზოკ და არმაზელ, სიფიცხლითა გულისა მათისათა არა შეუშინდეს, არამედ განამაგრნეს ციხენი და ქალაქნი თŐისნი..." (I, 47).
232 Giorgi
Leon Kavtaradze
N. 29: მანვე მოზღუდა მცხეთა ქალაქი ქŐთკირითა. და აქამომდე არა იყო ქართლსა შინა საქმე ქŐთკირისა. და ამის გამო დაისწავლეს ქŐთკირი. ამანვე არდამ მოჰკიდა კირი-ზღუდე ციხესა არმაზისასა და აქათ მტკურამდის, და წარმოზღუდა ცხŐრი არმაზისი ვიდრე მტკურამდე (I, 13)".
N. 30: "და ამანვე ფარნავაზ შექმნა კერპი დიდი სახელსა ზედა თŐისსა: ესე არს არმაზი, რამეთუ ფარნავაზს სპარსულად არმაზ ერქუა. ამართა კერპი იგი არმაზი თავსა ზედა ქართლისასა, და მიერითგან ეწოდა არმაზი კერპისა მისთŐს. და ქმნა სატფურება დიდი კერპისა მისთŐს აღმართებულისა (I, 25)''.
N. 31: "...დგა კაცი ერთი სპილენძისა, და ტანსა მისსა ეცუა ჯაჭŐ ოქროსი, და თავსა მისსა ჩაბალახი მყარი, და თუალნი ესხნეს ზურმუხტი და ბივრილი, და âელთა მისთა აქუნდა âრმალი ბრწყინვალე, ვითარცა ელვა, და იქცეოდა âელთა შინა... და კუალად იყო მარჯუენით მისსა კაცი ოქროსი და სახელი მისი გაცი; და მარცხენით მისსა უდგა კაცი ვეცხლისა, და სახელი მისი გაიმ, რომელნი-იგი ღმერთად უჩნდეს ერსა მას ქართლისასა (I, 89-90)'''.
N. 32: "ვითხოვოთ მისგან დამჭირვა სჯულსა ზედა მამათა ჩუენთასა, და ვითხოვოთ ჩუენ თანა არა აღრევა სპარსთა და წარჩინეულად პყრობა ჩუენი. ნუ უკუე შეიწყნაროს ვედრება ესე ჩუენი... მაშინ სიკუდილი უმჯობეს არს თავთა ჩუენთათŐს ვიდრე მონახვასა ესევითარისასა. დავსხნეთ თავნი ჩუენნი ციხეთა და ქალაქთა შინა და მოვსწყდეთ ყოველნი (I, 63)''.
N. 33: "და იყვნეს ესე თურქნი და ქართველნი ნებისმყოფელ ერთმანერთისა, მოელოდეს მოსლვასა სპარსთასა, ამაგრებდეს ციხეთა და ქალაქთა. მას ჟამსა შინა სადათაც ვინ მივიდის ძŐრის-მოქმედთაგან საბერძნეთით, გინა ასურით ოტებული, გინა ხაზარეთით, ყოველივე დაიმეგობრიან ქართველთა შემწეობისათŐს სპარსთა ზედა (I, 15)''.
N. 34: ''ხოლო დაიმორჩილა ოვსნი და ყივჩაყნი, და შექმნა კარნი ოვსეთისანი, რომელთა ჩუენ დარიანისად უწოდთ. და აღაშენა მას ზედა გოდოლნი მაღალნი, და დაადგინა მცველად მახლობელნი იგი მთეულნი. არა âელეწიფების გამოსლვად დიდთა მათ ნათესავთა ოვსთა და ყივჩაყთა თŐნიერ ბრძანებისა ქართველთა მეფისა (I, 156 ჩანართი თკ)''.
N. 35: "ვერ გაგიგიათ ქართველნო, შაგეხსნათ რკინის კარია,
მეფე აღარ გყავსთ ერეკლე, ბაგრატიონთა გვარია,
აღარ გაქვსთ ბაირახები, აღარ სჭექს ზარბაზანია,
. . .
ერთმანეთს ნუ უღალატებთ, მტერმა არ გთხაროსთ თვალია".
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abuladze, I. 1953. K'art'lis
C'xovrebis dzveli somxuri t'argmani. K'art'uli
tek'sti da dzveli somxuri t'argmani gamokvlevit'a da lek'sikonit. Tbilisi:
Tbilisis saxelmcip'o universitetis gamomc'emloba (in Georgian).
Acharean, H. 1971. Hayeren Armatakan Bararan.
Alexidze, Z. 1995. The New Recensions of the "Conversion of
Aliev, K.G. 1992. Antichnaya
Kavkazskaya Albaniya.
Allen, W. E. D. 1932. A History of the Georgian People from the Beginning down to the
Russian Conquest in the Nineteenth Century.
Allen, W. E. D. & Muratoff, P. 1953. Caucasian Battlefields. A History of Wars
on the Turco-Caucasian Border 1828 - 1921.
Apakidze, A. 1959. Mc'xet'a - Kartlis samepos dzveli dedakalaki.
Bedrosian. R. 1991. The Georgian Chronicle (Juansher's Concise History of the Georgians).
Translated from the At'. T'iroyan's edition (
Blockley, R. C. 1985. The History of Menander the Guardsman. Introductory Essay, Text,
Translation, and Historiographical notes. ARCA, Classical and Medieval
Texts, Papers and Monographs, 17. Ottawa: Francis Cairns.
Bosworth A. B. 1976. Vespasian's Reorganization
of the North-East Frontier, Antichthon,
Journal of the Australian Society for Classical Studies, vol. 10.
Bosworth, A. B. 1977. Arrian and the Alani, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology,
vol.81.
Bosworth, C. E. 1996. The Arabs,
Braund, D. 1993. King Flavius Dades, Zeitschrift
für Papyrologie und Epigraphie, Band 96. Braund, D. 1994.
Braund, D. 1997. The Caspian Gates in Roman-Persian Relations in Ancient
Cary, G. 1956. The Medieval Alexander.
Chaumont, M.-L. 1976. L'Armenie
entre Rome et Iran, in: Aufstieg und
Niedergang der Römischen Welt, Berlin, New York.
Debevoise, N. C. 1938. A Political History of
Dreher, M. 1994. Pompej na Kavkaze: Kolkhida, Iberia, Albania, Vestnik drevnej istorii, 1, (in Russian).
Eck, W. 2000. Neratius, in: Der neue
Pauly. Enzyklopädie der Antike. H. Cancik & H. Schneider (Hrsg.), B. 8.
Stuttgart, Weimar: Verlag J. B. Metzler.
Elnitskij, L. A. 1950. Severochernomorskie zametki, Vestnik drevnej istorii, 1, (in
Russian).
Eremyan, S. T. 1935. Feodal'nye obrazovaniya Kartli v period marzabanstva (532-627 gg.). Tezisyi dissertatsii. Leningrad (in
Russian).
Fähnrich, H. 1986. Kurze Grammatik
der Georgischen Sprache. Leipzig: VEB Verlag Enzyklopädie.
Gagoshidze, Yu. M. 1979. Samadlo
(arkheologicheskie raskopki). Tbilisi: Metsniereba (in Russian).
Garsoian, N. 1985.
Gigineishvili, B. & Giunashvili, V. 1979. Shatberdis krebuli X saukunisa. Tbilisi: Metsniereba (in Georgian).
Golden, P.B. 1983. The Turkic Peoples and
Gugushvili, A. 1936. The
Chronological-Genealogical Table of the Kings of
Halfmann, H. 1986. Die Alanen und die römische Ostpolitik unter Vespasian.
- Epiigraphica Anatolica, Zeitschrift für
Epigraphik und historische Geographie Anatoliens, Heft 8.
Halfmann H. 1991. ‘Nachbehandlung’: M. Hirrius Fronto Neratius Pansa, in: Studien zum antiken Kleinasiens. Friedrich
Karl Dörner zum 80. Geburtstag gewidmet. (Asia Minor Studien, Bd. 3:
Studien zum antiken Kleinasien.) Forschungsstelle Asia Minor im Seminar für
Alte Geschichte der Westfälischen-Wilhelms-Universität Münster. Für die Red.
Des vorliegenden Bd. sind verantwortl.:
Antke Schütte, Daniela Pohl und Jutta Teichmann. Bonn: Habelt.
Heil, M. 1989. M. Hirrius Fronto Neratius Pansa, legatus exercitus Africae.
- Chiiron, Mitteilungen der Kommission für Alte Geschichte und epigraphik des
Deutsches Archäologischen Instituts, Bd. 19.
Hewsen, R. H. 1992. The Geography of Ananias of Širak (Ašxarhac'oyc'), The Long and Short Recensions.
Introduction, Translation and Commentary by R. H. Hewsen.Wiesbaden. Beihefte
zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients, Reihe B, Nr. 77.
Honigmann, E. & Maricq, A. 1953. Recherches
sur les Res Gestae Divi Saporis. Bruxelles.
Inadze, M. 1955. Iberiisa da romis urt'iert'oba meore saukunis pirvel
naxevarshi. - Istoriis institutis
shromebi, I (in Georgian).
Ingoroqva, P. 1939. K'art'uli mcerlobis istoriis mokle mimoxlva. - Mnat'obi, 4 (in Georgian).
Ingoroqva, P. 1941. Leonti
Mroveli. - Enis, istoriisa da materialuri kulturis institutis mac'ne, X (in
Georgian).
Ingoroqva, P. 1941a. Dzvel-kartuli matiane "mok'c'evay
k'art'lisay" da antikuri xanis iberiis mep'eta sia. - Sak'art'velos saxelmcip'o muzeumis moambe, XI-B (in Georgian).
Isaac, B. 1990. The Limits of Empire. The Roman Army in the East.
Janashvili, M. 1905. K’art’lis C’xovreba -
Djitie Gruzii. - Sbornik materialov dlya
opisaniya mestnostej i plemen Kavkaza, XXXV (in Russian).
Javakhishvili,
Jones, H. L. (Ed.) 1924. The Geography of Strabo.
Kavtaradze, G. 1985. Anatoliashi kartvelur tomta gansakhlebis sakitkhisatvis. Tbilisi (in Georgian).
Kavtaradze, G. L. 1996. Probleme der historischen Geographie Anatoliens und
Transkaukasiens im ersten Jahrtausend v. Chr. in: Orbis Terrarum, Internationale Zeitschrift für Historische Geographie
der Alten Welt, 2, 1996. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.
Kekelidze, K. 1923. Leonti
Mroveli's literaturuli cqaroebi. - Tbilisis
saxelmcip'o universitetis moambe, III (in Georgian).
Kekelidze, K. 1958. K'art'uli
literaturis istoria, I. Tbilisi: Saxelgami (in Georgian).
Liddel, H. G. & Scott, R. 1950. A Greek-English Lexicon. A New Revised
and Augmented throughout by H. St. Jones, vol. II.
Lordkipanidze, G. 1998. Problemy vojny i mira v
antichnoi Gruzii (VI-IV vv. do n.e.), Caucasica,
The Journal of Caucasian Studies, vol. 2 (in Russian).
Mackinder, H.J. 1904. The Geographical Pivot of
History, in: The Geographical Journal,
vol.XXIII.
Manandyan, Ya. A. 1948. O mestonakhodjdenii Caspia via i Caspiae portae,
- Isttoricheskie zapiski, 25 (in
Russian).
Markwart, J. 1930. Iberer und Hyrkanier,
in: Caucasica, Fasc.6,
Leipzig.
McGing, B.C. 1986. The Foreign Policy of Mithridates VI Eupator King of
Melikishvili, G. A. 1959. K istorii
drevnei Gruzii. Tbilisi (in Russian).
Melikishvili, G. A. 1989. Istochniki. - Ocherki
Istorii Gruzii, I: Gruziya s
drevnejshikh vremen do IV v. n.e. Tbilisi: Metsniereba (in Russian).
Melikishvili, G. A. 1989a. Obrazovanie Kartlijskogo (Iberijskogo)
gosudarstva. - Ocherki Istorii Gruzii I.
Gruziya s drevnejshikh vremen do IV
v. n.e. Tbilisi: Metsniereba (in Russian).
Mitford, T. B. 1980. Cappadocia and Armenia Minor: Historical Setting of
the Limes, in: Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt, II Principat, 7.2
(Siebenter Band, 2. Halbband). H. Temporini (Hrsg.).
Mommsen, T. 1909. The Provinces of the
Mommsen, T. 1958. C. Iulius Solinus.
Collectanea Rerum Memorabilium. Iterum recensuit Th. Mommsen.
Berlin: Weidmannische Verlagsbuchhandlung.
Mouraviev, S. N. 1983. Ptolemeeva karta kavkazskoi Albanii i uroven'
Kaspiya, in: Vestnik Drevnej Istorii 1
(in Russian).
Noneshvili, A. 1999. The Relations of the Roman
Empire and the Kingdom of Iberia in the Second Half of the 1st Century A. D. -
Kulturis istoriis sakitxebi, VI. Tbilisi: Tbilisis saxelmtsipo universitetis gamomcemloba.
Olshausen, E. 1979. Zur Frage ständiger Gesandtschaften in Hellenistischer
Zeit, in: Antike Diplomatie. E.
Olshausen (Hrsg.). Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Olshausen, E. & Biller, J. 1984.
Historisch-geographische Aspekte der Geschichte des Pontischen und Armenischen
Reiches, Teil I. Untersuchungen zur
historischen Geographie von Pontos unter den Mithradatiden. Beihefte zu
Tübinger Atlas des Vordered Orients,
Reihe B, Nr. 29/1. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.
Pätsch, G. 1985. Das Leben Kartlis.
Eine Chronik aus Georgien 300-1200. Herausgegeben von Gertrud Pätsch.
Leipzig: Dieterich'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.
Qaukhchisvili, S. 1955. K'art'lis
C'xovreba. Tek'sti dadgenili qvela dzirit'adi xelnaceris mixedvit', I.
Tbilisi: Saxelgami (in Georgian).
Rapp, St. H. 1997. Imagining History at the Crossroads:
Rapp, St. H. (Ed.) 1998. K'art'lis c'xovreba. The Georgian Royal Annals and their Medieval
Armenian Adaptation. Vol. I. Anatolian and Caucasian Studies.
Rapp, St. H. (Ed.) 1998a. K'art'lis c'xovreba. The Georgian Royal Annals and their Medieval Armenian Adaptation. Vol. II.
Anatolian and Caucasian Studies.
Rayfield, D. 1994. The Literature of
Ridley, E. 1896. The Pharsalia of Lucan. Translated by Sir Edward Ridley.
Sanikidze, L. 1956. P'ontos samep'o.
Sarkissian, K. 1965. The Council of
Schwertheim, E. 1991. Iupiter Dolichenus,der Zeus von Doliche und der
kommagenische Königskult, in: Studien zum
antiken Kleinasien: Friedrich Karl Dörner zum 80. Geburtstag gewidmet.
Forschungsstelle Asia Minor im Seminar für Alte Geschichte der
Westfälischen-Wilhelms-Universität Münster. A. Schütte, D. Pohl, J. Teichmann
(Hrsg.). Asia Minor Studien, Bd. 3. Bonn: Habelt.
Schyboll, A. 1998. Georgisch (III. Literatur), in: Der neue Pauly. Enzyklopädie der Antike. H. Cancik & H.
Schneider (Hrsg.), B. 4. Stuttgart, Weimar: Verlag J. B. Metzler.
Sherk, R.K. 1980. Roman Galatia: The Governors from 25 B.C. to A.D. 114,
in: Aufstieg und Niedergang der römische
Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms in Spiegel der neueren Forschung, II.
Principat, siebenter Band (2. Halbband). Herausgegeben von H. Temporini. Berlin,
New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Sherwin-White, A.N. 1984. Roman Foreign Policy in the East 168 B.C. to A.D. 1. London.
Sinor, D. 1987. Introduction:
The Concept of Inner
Sonnabend, H. 1989. Pyrrhos
und die „Furcht“ der Römer vor dem Osten. - Chiron,
Mitteilungen der Kommission für Alte
Geschichte und epigraphik des Deutsches Archäologischen Instituts, Bd. 19.
Sonnabend, H. 1998. Ein Hannibal aus dem Osten? Die „letzten Pläne“ des
Mithridates VI. von Pontos, in: Alte
Gescichte: Wege-Einsichten-Horizonte: Festschrift für Eckart Olshausen zum 60. Geburtstag. U. Fellmeth & H.
Sonnabend (Hrsg.). Spudasmata, Studien zur Klassischen Philologie und ihren
Grenzgebieten, Bd. 69.
Speidel, M. P. 1978. The Religion of Iuppiter Dolichenus in the Roman Army. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Speidel, M. P. 1980. Jupiter
Dolichenus. Der Himmelsgott auf dem Stier.
Speidel, M. P. 1982. Auxiliary Units Named
after their Commanders: Four New Cases from
Syme, R. 1995. Flavian Wars and Frontiers, in: The
Täubler E. 1909. Zur Geschichte der Alanen, Klio, Beiträge zur alten Geschichte, B. 9.
Taqaishvili, E. 1890. Sami istoriuli
k'ronika. Tbilisi (in Georgian).
Taqaishvili, E. 1900. In: Sbornik
materialov dlya opisaniya mestnostej i plemen Kavkaza, XXVIII (in Russian).
Taqaishvili, E. 1909. Mok'c'evai
K'art'lisais Chelishuri varianti, in: Dzveli
Sak'art'velo, I, 5. Tbilisi
(in Georgian).
Tarchnishvili, M. 1947. Sources arméno-géorgiennes de l'histoire ancienne
de l'Église de Géorgie, in: Le Muséon
60.
Tarchnishvili, M. 1955. Gescichte
der kirchlichen georgischen Literatur (Studi e Testi 185). Cittŕ del Vaticano: Bibliotheca Apostolica
Vaticana.
Tarchnishvili, M. 1957. La découverte d'une inscription géorgienne de l'an
1066, in: Bedi Karthlisa 26-27.
Tarchnishvili, M. 1961. Le dieu lune Armazi, in: Bedi Karthlisa 36-37.
Thomson, R. W. 1980. Moses Khorenats'i . History of the Armenians. Translation and
Commentary on the Literary Sources by R.W.Thomson.
Thomson, R. W. 1976. Agathangelos History of the Armenians. Translation and Commentary
by R. W.Thomson.
Thomson, R. W. 1996. Rewriting Caucasian History. The Medieval Armenian Adaptation of the
Georgian Chronicles. The Original Georgian Texts and the Armenian
Adaptation. Translated with Introduction and Commentary by R. W. Thomson.
Torelli, M. 1968. The Cursus Honorum of M.
Hirrius Fronto Neratius Pansa. - The
Journal of Roman Studies, vol.
LVIII.
Toumanoff, C. 1943. Medieval Georgian
Historical Literature (VIIth - XVth Centuries). - Traditio,
Toumanoff, C. 1947. The Oldest Manuscript of
the Georgian Annals: The Queen Anne Codex (QA), 1479-1495. - Traditio, V. Studies in Ancient and Medieval History, Thought and Religion.
Toumanoff, C. 1963. Studies in Christian Caucasian History.
Toumanoff, C. 1969. Chronology of the Early
Kings of
Toynbee, A. J. 1956. A Study of History, vol.II.
Trever, K. V. 1959. Ocherki po istorii i kul'ture kavkazskoj
Albanii.
Tseretheli, M. von. 1935. The Asianic (
Whinston, W. et al., 1895. Flavius Josephus. The Works of
Flavius Josephus.
Translated by William Whiston, A.M. Auburn and
Winkler, G. 1988. C. Plinius Secundas
d.Ä. Naturkunde. Lateinish-Deutsch. Bücher III/IV. Geographie: Europa.
Herausgegeben und übersetzt von G. Winkler in Zusammenarbeit mit R. König.
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt. München & Zürich: Artemis.
Zhgenti, S. 1953. Chanur-megrulis
p'onetika. Tbilisi (in Georgian).
Back:
http://www.geocities.com/komblege/publications2.htm
or
http://www.geocities.com/komblege/kavta.html
[1] Toynbee 1956, 31, 101, 208ff.
[2] Golden 1983, 67.
[3] Toynbee 1956, 112, 175ff., 181. The
same is true as it was observed by A. Toynbee in connection with the Danubian
Hapsburg monarchy. The raison d'etre of which was to serve as a march of the Western
Society against another universal state, the Ottoman Empire.It was called into
existence at a moment when the Ottoman pressure upon the Western world became
really formidable and it remained in the first rank of the Great Powers of
Europe as long as the Ottoman pressure remained at its height; Austro-Hungary
finally fell to pieces in the First World War (1914-1918) when the Ottoman
Empire received its coup de grâce
(Toynbee 1956, 177, 181).
[4] Plin.
[5] Cf. Sherwin-White 1984, 199f.
[6] Opus majus 1,301.
[7] Allen/Muratoff 1953, 7.
[8] After the unification of the
Western and Eastern parts of
[9]As to M. Brosset, J. Sen-Marten, D.
Bakradze, M. Janashvili, P. Ingoroqva, G. Tsereteli, G. Melikishvili, these
annals are convincing, while K. Patkanov, I. Javakhishvili and K. Kekelidze are
much more sceptical.
[10]Rapp 1998, 14.
[11]Qaukhchishvili 1955, 024ff.
[12]E.g. Pätsch
1985, 14; Schyboll 1998, 946. In the
opinion of C. Toumanoff, its testimony has stood well the scrutiny of
scholarship and can be given our credence (Toumanoff 1963, 443).
[13]Qaukhchishvili 1955, 015; v. also
Toumanoff 1947, 340-344.
[14]St. Rapp remarks that it is a
translation, an adaptation, and an abbreviation and at the same time an inexact
rendition of a now-lost Georgian exemplar (Rapp 1998, 31).
[15]Thomson 1996, v.; Rapp 1998a, 3. The
Armenian version must be dated without any doubt from 1125 to 1270 - or the
last event mentioned in its text (it must also be taken into account that the
author of the Armenian adaptation claims personal acquaitance with the most famous
Georgian king of the late elevanth - early twelfth century, David IV, the
Restorer, who died in 1125) and the first direct quotation from the text by
Vardan Arewelc'i - but the internal evidencies demonstrate that it was
plausibly translated in the first half of the twelfth century. The earliest
Armenian historian known to have been familiar with "K'art'lis C'xovreba" is Mxit'ar of Ani whose own History went down to 1187 (Thomson 1996,
xlii, xliv, l). In the opinion of C. Toumanoff and R. Bedrosian, he used the
chronicle in its Armenian version (Toumanoff 1943, 161; Bedrosian 1991).
[16]The earliest manuscript has reached
us in a copy made between 1279 and 1311 (v.
Abuladze 1953, 020). As no Georgian manuscript of "K'art'lis C'xovreba" dated before the fifteenth century
survived, the Armenian version has a special importance for the reconstruction
of its initial content and
authenticating its earlier provenance (cf. Melikishvili 1989, 22). According to
St. Rapp, the Armenian translation which is a rather faithful rendition of the
Georgian historical traditions is insofar crucial as it represents the most
compelling proof of the medieval provenance of the structure of the initial
section of "K'art'lis
C'xovreba" (Rapp 1998a, 18).
[17]Rapp 1998, 18.
[18]Melikishvili 1959, 29-31; Rapp 1998, 20.
[19]Rapp 1998, 20.
[20]Tarchnishvili 1957, 86-89; Toumanoff
1969, 1n3. C. Toumanoff believes, that he is, at all events, anterior to 973
(Toumanoff 1963, 24).
[21]Thomson 1996, 255. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 1. Here and subsequently concerning the pages of "K'art'lis C'xovreba" which
are noted in brackets, see, Qaukhchishvili 1955.
[22]Thomson 1996, 255. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 2.
[23]Thomson 1996, v, xxxviii. In reality
the Armenian translation comprises six works by four authors and goes down to
the time of the death of David the Restorer or 1125. As to R. W. Thomson, the
new title of the Armenian translation,
The Georgian Chronicles, gives a wrong impression, failing to distinguish
the part from the whole, as it comprises only a small part of the total number
of such works written in Georgian (Thomson 1996, xxxviii).
[24]Kekelidze 1958, 208; Melikishvili
1959, 30. In R. W. Thomson's translation: "This abbreviated history was found in times of trouble and placed in
this book called "K'art'lis C'xoreba" which means
"History of K'art'li". Juansher found it composed up to King
Vaxt'ang, and himself continued it up to this point" (104) (Thomson 1996, 255). In the square
brackets of R. W. Thompson's translation the pages of the
[25]Rapp 1998a, 1.
[26]Allen 1932, 16; Toumanoff 1943, 166.
[27]Rapp 1998, 25f.
[28]Rapp 1997, v. Rapp 1998, 22.
[29]Rapp 1998, 18.
[30]Rapp 1998, 23f.
[31]The Armenian Church condemned
Georgians at the Third Council of Dwin in 608/609, though the schism was
formalized in 726 at the Armenian Council of Manazkert (v. Sarkissian 1965, 2, 206n1, 215; Garsoian 1985, 236f.; Rapp 1998,
17).
[32]Melikishvili 1989, 24, 26. At the
beginning of the eleventh century in the Georgian ecclesiastical literature
there were not only lacunae in the translations of the Church Fathers being
filled, but also new versions of the biblical, liturgical, and hagiographical
texts, then in use in Constantinople, were written (Thomson 1996, xxxvii; cf.
Tarchnishvili 1955).
[33]Kekelidze 1923, 53ff.; Ingorokva
1941; Melikishvili 1959, 31f.
[34]Melikishvili 1989, 26. The
manuscript tradition of The History of
the Armenians by Movses Xorenac'i does not predate the fourteenth century,
though it is well known that many Classical (Graeco-Roman) texts are also
preserved only in medieval redactions (Rapp, 1998, 15).
[35]Besides some details, given only in "K'art'lis C'xovreba", have
parallels to the texts of Tacitus, Cassius Dio etc. (Toumanoff 1943, 169; cf.
Janashvili 1905, 216-220).
[36]Alexidze 1995.
[37]E.g.
Taqaishvili 1909, 16; Thomson 1996, xxxviii; Toumanoff 1943, 149.
[38]Tarchnishvili 1955, 87f., 406.
[39]Tarchnishvili 1947, 33ff.; Tarchnishvili
1955, 87.
[40]Alexidze 1995. The text of the Conversion appears to be substantally a
variation of the story basing on Rufinus' "De
Conversione Gentis Iberorum per Captivam Facto" of the end of the
fourth century (Taqaishvili 1900, 80, 93, 104; Toumanoff 1943, 151).
[41]V. Rayfield
1994, 49.
[42]Taqaishvili 1890, xviii-xx, xlv-lxxix.
[43]The information about the existence
of such a narrative is included as an additional remark in the earliest
manuscript of "K'art'lis
C'xovreba" which survived, The
Queen Anne codex of the fifteenth century (Ingorokva 1939, 107f., 137f.;
Ingorokva 1941a, 283f.). At the same time, as the whole of "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay" is full of Grecisms, this fact
is believed to indicate that its composition, at least in its original stages,
can possibly be ascribed to a period anterior to the fifth century and the rise
of a fully developed national feudal-ecclesiastical literature (v. Toumanoff 1943, 151f.).
[44]E.g. Toumanoff 1943, 148f.; Fähnrich 1986,
12.
[45]Thomson 1996, xxxvii; Rapp 1998, 9.
[46]Rapp 1998, 19.
[47]Toumanoff 1943, 150f.; Melikishvili 1959,
47-62; Rapp 1998, 24.
[48]Rapp 1998, 24.
[49]Rapp 1998, 17.
[50]Melikishvili 1989, 25; Melikishvili 1989a,
255.
[51]The most widespread theory explains
"Arian K'art'li" as the
Persian (i.e. Arian from Old Persian ariyana) or Achaemenidian part of K'art'li, located in its
southwesternmost part (Melikishvili 1959, 278). Arian K'art'li was also considered to be the same as ‘Αράνη of Ptolemy (V, 6, 18) and the
Harrana of the Hittites, lying in Armenia Minor and close to
Thogorma/Tegaramma/Til Garimu (Tseretheli 1935, 50-54; Toumanoff 1963, 90n124).
[52] I,23.
[53]The
same conclusion can be deduced from the indirect information of The Life of King Vaxtang Gorgasali by
Juansher (Qaukhchishvili 1955, 139-244), see, Kavtaradze 1996, 205ff.
[54]Blockley 1985, 68f.
[55]Melikishvili 1959, 47-50, 276-283, 291.
[56] Plin., n. h. 6,12,31.
[57] Strabo 2, I, 2-7; Plin., n. h. 2,67,167-168; 6,21,58.
[58]Toumanoff 1963, 81n104.
[59]Rapp 1998, 24.
[60]G. Lordkipanidze considers patrik of the text as a derivative from
the Greek πατρικός with the meaning of
"forefather", see, Lordkipanidze 1998, 160. In R. W. Thomson's
translations of both texts (the Georgian original and the Armenian version)
this word is translated as patrician
(20) (Thomson 1996, 25).
[61]Thomson 1996, 23, 25f. For the
original text see Appendix, N. 3.
[62] Thomson 1996, 25f.
[63] Here and subsequently concerning
the pages of "Mok'c'evay
K'art'lisay" which are noted in brackets, see, Gigineishvili &
Giunashvili 1979. As to The Life of St. Nino - the second part of the chronicle "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay"
- the idols Gaci and Ga were in Arian K'art'li deities of the ancestors of Georgians (Gigineishvili & Giunashvili 1979,
335).
[64] Thomson 1980, 140f.
[65] Cf. Olshausen 1979, 292.
[66] Euseb., Praep. Evang., 9,41,I; Chron., I; cf. Josephus, Con. Apion., I; Strabo
15,1,6.
[67] Euseb., Chronicle: Aucher, I: 58-9.
[68] Thomson 1980, 141n.14.
[69] Thomson 1980, 147.
[70]Melikishvili 1959, 39 and n.95.
[71] McGing 1986, 44.
[72] As it was indicated by R. W.
Thomson, Moses is confusing the claim of these princes to descent from the
Iberian Mihrdat with the various Mithridates of Pontus (Thomson 1980,
147f.n.7).
[73] Melikishvili 1959, 47-50, 233, 283.
[74] It is known also as Dariali, Ossetian, Sarmatian, Iberian or
Aragvian Gate.
[75] Cl. Ptol., 5,3,16; Euseb. Hier.,
Epist., 77,8.
[76] In Pliny's words, "Haec est Macedonia terrarum imperio
potita quondam, haec Asiam, Armeniam, Hiberiam, Albaniam, Cappadociam, Syriam,
Aegyptum, Taurum, Caucasum transgressa.. " (
[77]The cannon-ball found in the ruins
of the late fourth - early third century B.C. levels of Samadlo had a diameter
of 21 cm and a weight of 9,5 kg (Gagoshidze, 1979, 40, 48, 96; Lordkipanidze
1998, 159f.).
[78]Tarn 1984, 113, 119; Lordkipanidze 1998,
159f.
[79] Strab. 11, 14, 9.
[80] Strab. 11, 2,
19.
[81] 15,4, 14-15.
[82]Kavtaradze 1996, 209-213.
[83]It seems that the expansion of the
Armenian territory to the river
[84]Toumanoff 1943, 142, 150f., 443; cf.
Gugushvili 1936, 109f. C. Toumanoff considered
[85] Cf. I, 18.
[86]Cf. Melikishvili 1959, 280f.
[87] I, 25.
[88]Melikishvili 1959, 39. If by the
Georgian text they gained a high position due to P'arnavaz (I, 25), the Armenian translation
attributes this fact more logically (if we will follow the explanation of the "K'art'lis C'xovreba" namely that the term "aznauri" with the meaning "gentry, nobility"
meant the follower of Azo) already at
the time of Azon's reign: "Azon appointed from among them
commanders trought the whole land of Georgia" (20) (v.Thomson 1996, 26).
[89] I, 18.
[90]Gagoshidze, 1979, 97; cf. Tiroyean
1884, 12, v. Bedrosian 1991.
[91]Lordkipanidze 1998, 160.
[92] Liddel & Scott 1950, 1534.
[93] Cf. Cary 1956.
[94] Thomson 1996, 25. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 4.
[95] For the original text see Appendix,
N. 5.
[96] I, 17.
[97] I, 17.
[98] Thomson 1996, 25. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 6.
[99] The Life of the Kings (I, 12) defines the territory
of the Ossetians as the portion of the
[100] I, 11-13, 27, 63, 65-66.
[101]Thomson 1996, 13f. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 7.
[102]Thomson 1996, 166. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 8.
[103]Thomson 1996, 328. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 9.
[104]Thomson 1996, 16. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 10.
[105]Thomson 1996, 14. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 11. The Khazar
offensive south of the
[106]Thomson 1980, 211f.
[107]Thomson 1976, 37.
[108]Thomson 1996, 70f. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 12.
[109]Thomson 1980, 236f.
[110]Thomson 1996, 149. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 13.
[111]Rapp 1998, 17.
[112]Thomson 1996, 78. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 14.
[113]Thomson 1996, 79. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 15.
[114]Thomson 1996, 161. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 16.
[115]Thomson 1980, 265.
[116]Thomson 1980, 145.
[117]Thomson 1980, 135.
[118] II,6.
[119] II,8,11.
[120] 30,1,2,11.
[121] As his vision as one of the main
western specialists of the history of Caucasia is also nowadays of
historiographical importance, we cite him to underline the striking difference
which characterizes the two areas across the Caucasian range: "...beyond the Caucasus was the land of the Hyperboreans of the Greeks
and the Gogs and Magogs of the Semites, the breeding ground of slaves and
conquerors and also of the passivistic thoughts, where the mists, flat forests
and the oozing swamps can maudle men, but in the Caucasus you are among the
high shining mountains; the sparkling seas are near the woods of this uneven
country are ever changing - not always the lament birches and mean - visaged
pines of the sandy steppe. You are in the land of Nearer Asia, where man, among
the mountains, between the seas and in the pellucid sunlight, early grew to
prying intellect; lands of vivid life, of doings and undoings, of rising up and
falling down of splendours and of of shambles, of wisdom, and of scattering. If
on the one hand, the leaders of the passive-thinking soldier-stuffwere on the
top for goods - Turks, Tatars, Turkomans, thick man from steppe, like rocks hardened
by millennia of the inclement elements, small-eyed, broad faced men with short
necks, big eaters, of a crude and simple humour, incurious, slowe in the
uptake, on the other hand, the sprightly men, of that old, inquisitive,
restless, creative, sparkling, high-pitched way of mind - Greeks, Georgians,
the real Persians, Arabs - were gotten under, smashed and trampled on." Allen 1932, 5f., 147.
[122] Plin., n. h. 6, 30.
[123] Plin., n. h. 6, 30.
[124]Khalif Wathiq in 842 sent an envoy,
Sallâm the Interpreter, into Central Asia to find something out concerning the
wall of iron and brass erected by Alexander the Great against the barbarian
giants of the outer steppes, Gog and
Magog, as is described in Quran (XVIII, 82-96) (Bosworth 1996, XIII, 22).
[125]Mouraviev 1983.
[126]Thomson 1996, 16. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 17.
[127]Cf. Hewsen 1992, 122.
[128] Tac. Ann. 6, 33.
[129]Thomson 1996, 17. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 18.
[130] II,
8, 11.
[131] Plin., n.h. 6, 29.
[132]Allen 1932, 61.
[133]Kavtaradze 1985, 85, 173n.361.
[134]Apakidze 1959, 36f.
[135]In the text of the Armenian
adaptation: "And close to us are the
Ossetes, and Alans, and Leks, and Sonk', and Xazars, and all the region of the
north" (40). V. Thomson 1996, 75.
[136]Thomson 1996, 75. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 19.
[137]Thomson 1996, 241. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 20.
[138]Thomson 1996, 261f. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 21.
[139] Tac. Ann. 6, 33.
[140]Cf. Melikishvili 1989a, 256. Who
identifies Azo's Roman supporters
with the Greeks.
[141]Thomson 1996, 25f.
[142]Thomson 1996 25n6.
[143]Acharean 1971; cf. Abuladze 1953,
027 and Thomson 1996 25n6.
[144]Jones 1924.
[145]
[146] Dio 37,1,4.
[147] Plin.
[148]Melikishvili 1959, 325; Dreher 1994, 31.
[149] Plut., Pomp. 36.
[150]Sanikidze 1956, 193f.; Melikishvili 1959,
324f.
[151] Dio 37, 3.
[152] Dio 37, 1.
[153] Plut. Pomp. 34; Dio 37ff.; Strabo
11,3,5.
[154]By the information of Strabo,
Canidius went to
[155]As to Cassius Dio (155-235): „Publius Canidius Crassus made a campaign
against the Iberians in Asia, conquered in battle their king Pharnabazus and
brought them to make an alliance; with this king he invaded Albania, the
adjoining country, and, after overcoming the inhabitants and their king Zober,
conciliated them likewise“ (XLIV, 24, 1) v. Cary 1969a, 391.
[156] Dio XLIX, 24f.
[157]Melikishvili 1959, 335ff.
[158]V. Isaac 1990, 43.
[159] Plin. n.h. 6, 15, 40.
[160]Isaac 1990, 43f.
[161]As to Dio’s information, among
Nero’s numerous little jokes there was a story that „in the Alban territory it rained so much blood that rivers of it
flowed over the land“ (63, 26, 5), v.
Cary 1968, 185. Maybe this
information indicates the factual troubles existing in the east Transcaucasian
area and at the same time the truthfulness of Tacitus’ quotation about the
preparation of Nero’s expedition against Albanians.
[162] The Albanian hostility towards
Romans begins with the Pompey’s invasion of
[163] Mommsen 1909, 62n.1. Different from this case, the
inscription of Ka’ba-i-Zardošt of the Sasanian shah of Iran, Šapur I, mentions,
in the opinion of some speciallists, mistakenly Alanian gates instead of Albanian
gates (v. Honigmann & Maricq 1953, 88).
[164] Tac. Ann. 12, 45.
[165]Syme 1995, 143. The fear of the
eastern threat was for a long time a characteristic trait of the Roman policy (v. Sonnabend 1989, 319-345; Sonnabend
1998 191-206).
[166]V. Ridley
1896.
[167]Sherk 1980, 992.
[168]V. Whinston,
1895.
[169]In Dio’s words: „When the Parthians, who had become involved in war with some
neighbours, asked for his [Vespasian’s -
G.K.] help, he would not go to their
aid, declaring that it was not proper for him to interfere in others affairs“
(LXV, 15,3), v. Cary 1968, 291. Suetonius
(c. 69 - c. 140) gives additionnal data about the state of affairs: when
Vologaesus, King of the Parthians, had asked for auxiliaries against the Alani
and for one of Vespasian's sons as their leader, Domitian used every effort to
have himself sent rather than Titus; and because the affair came to nothing, he
tried by gifts and promises to induce other eastern kings to make the same
request (Suet. Dom., 2, 1).
[170]Suet. Vesp.
8, 4: propter adsiduos barbarum
incursus.
[171]V. Halfmann,
1986, 40f.
[172] In the information of Suetonius,
when Vologaesus, King of the Parthians, sent envoys to the Senate to renew his
alliance, he begged that honor be paid to the memory of Nero. Suetonius also
informs that many years after Nero’s death, his name was still in the big favor
with the Parthians (Suet. Nero, LVII).
[173]Sherk 1980, 995.
[174]Debevoise 1938, 201n60.
[175]About the location of Satala near
modern Sadak (former Sazak) see, Olshausen & Biller 1984, 163.
[176]This oldest capital of
[177]Halfmann 1986, 48; In the later
published article, H. Halfmann stresses that Fronto’s command to the East was
connected with the invasion of the Alans, well testified by the sources and
dated in A.D. 75-76 (Halfmann 1991,
42).
[178]Halfmann 1986, 48.
[179]V. Braund
1997, 3.
[180]Thomson 1996, 52. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 22. In The Life of King Vaxtang Gorgasali, as
well as in The Life of David, King of
Kings (see below), Vespasian is mentioned together with his son Titus: "...as Isaiah says: "Remove and destroy every child of
theirs - by Titus and Vespasian" (I, 164). v. Thomson 1996, 181.
For the original text see Appendix, N. 23.
[181]Heil 1989, 174f.
[182]Bosworth 1976, 75.
[183]Torelli 1968, 172f.
[184]Melikishvili 1959, 56, 58.
[185] II, 8, 11.
[186]Toumanoff 1969, 3.The Georgian term
of Latin vitaxa (Greek - pitiάxhς) is pitiaxši, Armenian - bdešx. The most likely etymology of this term which
is translated by the Classical writers as king or tetrarch, is its derivation from the Old Persian *pa[i]ti-axši/a, the first element of
which signifies "head",
while the second is related to xšayami ("I rule") (Toumanoff
1963, 155ff.); Georgian historians compare this term with the Georgian title erist'avi, "the head of the army or people" (Apakidze 1959, 27n1).
In the opinion of C. Toumanoff, if
there is not a lack of documentary evidence of Arsacid (Parthian) use of this
term, then it seems to have been introduced in Caucasia in the epoch of the Old
Persian language, though the Achaemenidian institution of viceroys or
super-governors (the function of vitaxa), was known only at pre-Parthian
times at the Seleucidian court (Toumanoff
1963, 156, 158). As the Georgian form, patiaxši/pitiaxši, is considered closer to the Old Persian prototype than
the Armenian form and therefore belonging to the pre-Parthian times (cf.
Toumanoff 1963, 158), its origin should be searched in connection with the
events of the Seleucid or even of the Achaemenid times.
[187]Thomson 1996, 49. For the original text
see Appendix, N. 24.
[188]In the Armenian translation of the
twelfth century: "Adrik gave a crown
to his two sons, dividing the land between them. K'art'li with its extensive
borders he gave to Bartos; and to K'art'am he gave Xunan as far as Klarjet'i.
Then he died" (30). Both fragments are translated by R. W.
Thomson, v. Thomson 1996, 52. For the
original text see Appendix, N. 25.
[189]Thomson 1996, 53f. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 26. In the Armenian translation of the twelfth century: "...the Georgian kings Azuk and Azmayer summoned to heir aid the
kings of the Leks and Ossetes, two brothers Bazuk and Anbazuk. These brought
with them the Pacaniks and Jiks, Durjuks, and Didos. The Georgian troops
gathered together at one place, unexpectedly entered Armenian territory while
the latter were unprepared, ravaged Sirak and Vanand as far as Basen, then
returned to the plain of Naxjawan. They seized much booty, and went out through
the
[190] Hist. Fr. 47.
[191] De Mag., 3,52.
[192] 1,10,9ff.
[193]Thomson 1980, 191.
[194]Eremyan 1935, 3: Manandyan 1948, 69f.;
Inadze 1955, 317; Melikishvili 1959, 345; Trever 1959, 126; Toumanoff, 1969. As to the explanation which
connected this invasion with the Caspian
Gate situated south of the Caspian and east of
[195]Thomson 1996, 333f. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 27.
[196] The Jewish War,
7,7,4.
[197]Thomson 1980, 236f.
[198]Thomson 1996, 56. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 28.
[199]E.g. Melikishvili 1959, 348.
[200]Cf. Heil 1989, 174f. As to the infomation of The Life of the Kings approximately at
that place is indicated the erection of the defence wall by the legendary
Persian military leader of pre-Alexander times, Ardam: "...Ardam
undertook the mortared wall the castle of Armazi, and from there as far as the
Mtkuari [The
[201]Apakidze 1959, 72f., Pl. LXI.
[202]Toumanoff 1963, 102n154; cf. Apakidze
1959, 73.
[203]Debevoise 1938, 201f.
[204] Silv. 4, 4, 63f.
[205] Bosworth 1977, 227.
[206] Aliev 1992, 76; Mitford 1980, 1194n.57.
[207] Elnitskij 1950, 194.
[208] Apakidze 1959, 72f., Pl. LXI.
[209] Mitford 1980, 1194.
[210] Aliev 1992, 76.
[211] Cf. Melikishvili 1959, 351f.
[212] The translation is cited by
Bosworth 1977, 231.
[213]Bosworth 1977, 231.
[214]V. Braund
1993, 48f.
[215]Debevoise 1938, 222. The translation
of the Greek text is cited by Braund 1994, 230.
[216]Cary 1968, 471.
[217]Toumanoff 1963, 101f.
[218]Noneshvili 1999, 176.
[219] I, 18.
[220] I, 18.
[221]Speidel 1982, 165-172.
[222]At the same time, the absence of the
consonant n in the Georgian term
could be abscribed to the redaction of the text (the development of an
additional n before some consonants,
e.g. kitri ("cucumber") > kintri, typical of some Georgian
dialects (cf. Zhgenti 1953, 99ff.)). In that case, we could consider the
"suffix" ado-selni, as
consisting of the Greek suffix of "origin or inhibitation" - ates/atis and the Georgian plural suffix
of "origin" - selni.
[223] I, 18.
[224]Thomson 1996, 25.
[225]Cf. Halfmann 1991, 41; Eck 2000,
844.
[226]M. Hirri[s ---f.. ---n. F]ron[to
Neratius Pansa, cos.,] | curotor a[edium
sacraru]m et oper[um locorumq. Publicorum, adlectus ab] | imp. Caesare
Ves[pasiano Aug. inter pa]tricios, ab [eodem donatus hastis puris IIII,
vexillis IIII, coronis IIII,] murali,
vallari, [classica, aurea (?) -----] im [---- |
c]ensendo reg(ionis) (decimae), leg. pr. pr[aet. imp. Caes.
Vespasiani Aug. exerci]tus qui in A[rmeniam maiorem (?) missus est ------,]
| XV vir s. f., leg. pr. pr. imp. [Caes.
Vespasiani Aug. pro]vinciae Ca[ppadociae Galatiae Armeniae
minoris------------]“. Cf. Torelli 1968, 173, pl. XI.
[227]As to the critical discussion about
M. Heils proposal to consider
[228]In the text of the Armenian
adaptation: "He made a great image
in his own name, that is Armaz; for P'arnawaz was called Armaz in the Persian
language. He erected the image at the entrance to K'art'li, which is called up
to now the mountain Armaz" (24). Both fragments are translated by R. W. Thomson, v. Thomson 1996, 36. For the original Georgian text see Appendix, N. 30.
[229]The name of P'arnavaz is based upon
the Persian notion of farnah, or royal glory (v. Rapp 1998, 25).
[230]Tarchnishvili 1961, 36-40.
[231]Toumanoff 1963, 100n151. The cult of
a bull, a remnant of local paganism, is vividly depicted on the religious
monuments of the earliest stage of Georgian Christianity.
[232]For the original text see Appendix,
N. 31.
[233]Both these fragments are translated
by R. W. Thomson, v. Thomson 1996, 97f.
[234]Speidel 1978, 1; Speidel 1980, 7-13,
17-18, figs. 7, 9, 11, 21, 38, 41; Schwertheim 1991, 40.
[235] I,
89.
[236]Speidel 1978, 21-24. It must be
noticed that gold and silver utensils were used in the cult of Iupiter Dolichenus (Speidel 1980, 17).
[237]Speidel 1980, 12, 16, 18, fig. 31.
[238]Tseretheli 1935, 45-50.
[239]Thomson 1996, 74. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 32.
[240]Thomson 1996, 20. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 33.
[241]Sinor 1987, 2.
[242]Sinor 1987, 6 (map).
[243]Sinor 1987, 1.
[244]Mackinder 1904.
[245]Sinor 1987, 3.
[246]Sinor 1987, 4f.
[247]In D. Rayfield's translation, v. Rayfield 1994, 228.
[248]Sinor 1987, 17.
[249]Sinor 1987, 17f.
[250]Allen 1932, 31.
[251]Thomson 1996, 362f. For the original
text see Appendix, N. 34.
[252]This folk poem was recorded by Peter
Umikashvili in the middle of the nineteenth century. For the original text see Appendix, N. 35.