One of the latest achievements in the study of historical geography is the consideration of ancient maps through the prism of geographical orientations of their authors — ancient historians-geographers (Hecateus, Strabo, Pliny the Elder, Ptolemy, etc.). Thus, such an angle of research allowed scientists to conclude that Ptolemy, when describing geographical locations of localities, was guided by the northern orientation [Ptol., V, 13, § 9, 13, 18, 20; Podosinov and Chekin, 1990, p. 211; Podosinov, 1999, p. 4. 244, 263-267, 313-315, 327-329, 397-398]. This approach makes it possible to determine with a high degree of probability the authorship of the ancient Armenian map, known as "Armenian Geography", or "Ashkharatsuyts" (Ancient Army), which is still controversial to date. "Showing the World").
Keywords: historical geography and cartography, "Ashkharatsuyts", western orientation, enumeration of administrative divisions, Movses Khorenatsi, Anania Shirakatsi.
Summing up the results of the analysis of Shirakatsi's work, E. L. Danielyan came to the conclusion I share: "Ashkharatsuyts" was created by the father of Armenian historiography Movses Khorenatsi (V century), but the final image was obtained due to the correction, refinement and addition of Ananias Shirakatsi (VII century) [Danielyan, Melkonyan, 2007, p.143].
Shirakatsi's work clearly reflects the role of God in the creation of the world. Already at the beginning of Ashkharatsuyts, he writes:
"Having found nothing detailed in the Holy Scriptures about land surveying, except for rare, scattered, and at the same time difficult to comprehend and obscure information, we are forced to turn to pagan writers who established geographical science based on Travel and Navigation, and confirmed it with Geometry, which owes its origin to Astronomy" (Patkanov, 1877,p. 4). p. 1].
The author divides the scientific world into pagan researchers and Christian researchers, to which he belongs. God created this world "not aimlessly, but for living" (Anania Shirakatsi, 1979, p. 258). Then the author quotes the words of the biblical David that God created the world from north to south, and the role of a person is to walk along it, to know and reveal all its secrets [Podosinov, 1999, pp. 244-245, 263-266]. In the worldview of the medieval author, the world was created by God, and its (world) beginning is the north, because there is the axis of the earth. Thus, Shirakatsi, like ancient geographers, adhered to the northern orientation [Anania Shirakatsi, 1979, p. 258 et seq.]. The fact that the starting point is the north, he mentions several times. In the southern direction, Shirakatsi in its description reaches the northern part of the Mediterranean coast of Africa. South of this territory, he knows only about the existence of Ethiopia. Lands located to the south are-
page 88
page 89
They are terra incognita for Shirakatsi, and he often refers to them as "Tierra del Fuego" (Anania Shirakatsi, 1979, p. 258-312).
Shirakatsi, as well as other ancient authors (Hipparchus, Eratosthenes, Strabo, Marin of Tyre, Ptolemy, as well as the author of the "Pevtinger Map"), proceeds from the "northern" orientation [Dushkov, 1987, pp. 15-73; Podosinov, 1999, pp. 244-245, 260, 263, 266]. However, despite the pronounced northern orientation, when listing countries, as well as when describing in detail the administrative-territorial division of Greater Armenia, he is guided by the direction from west to east, from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific.
It is very difficult to give an unambiguous and definitive answer regarding the geographical orientation of Ashkharatsuyts, but we can confidently state the orientation of the final version, i.e., the Shirakatsi version. In it, "Ashkharatsuyts" has a western orientation, i.e. the list of localities goes from west to east. The author of this work adheres to this orientation not only when considering the ecumene of that time, but also when describing the regions of Greater Armenia.
The author begins the description of the ecumene with Spain, and then lists the countries of Europe in the following order: Britain, Gaul, Germany, Dalmatia, Italy, Sardinia, Sicily, Sarmatia, Thrace, Macedonia, Hellas. Then there are the countries of Libya, or Africa, from Mauritania of Tingatan to Upper Ethiopia. The author of Ashkharatsuyts does not follow the point of view of ancient and early medieval scholars who considered Africa to be the third part of the world (Lev Afrikskiy, 1983, passim). Shirakatsi, guided by the principle of a real geographical location-Africa is located to the west of Asia-puts this continent in second place. Africa is followed by Asia, which begins with Bithynia. After studying the countries of Asia Minor (Mysia, Lycia, Phrygia, Paphlagonia, Galatia, Pamphylia, Pontus, Cilicia), the author turns to Transcaucasia, namely to Colchis, Beria (Iberia), which in Armenian sources is known as Virk, then to Albania (Caucasian Albania) and, finally, to Greater Armenia.
The description of Armenia in Ashkharatsuyts unfolds from west to east. So, first the western regions of Greater Armenia are listed in this order: High Armenia (Karpyuk, 2010, p. 22, 61, 89, 118, 128 et seq.), Fourth Armenia (i.e. Tsopk, or Sofena - it was under this toponym that the region was known among ancient authors), Aldznik (Arzanene), Turuberan, Mokk (Mohepe), Korchayk (Korjayk- - Corduene-Gorduene). The seventh Shirakatsi calls Persarmenia, although it would be more accurate to mention Taik, which in Georgian sources is known as Tao-Klarjet, and in ancient historians-Tao. The author skips the northwestern edge of Greater Armenia and moves along the southern border from west to east.
What causes this? The assumption that Movses Khorenatsi, and especially Anania Shirakatsi, did not accurately represent the geographical position of the regions, seems naive. The answer to this question, in my opinion, is simple. In all periods of the history of ancient Armenia, it was from the south that enemies invaded the country. Therefore, Shirakatsi breaks the sequence and moves along the southern border, skipping the central and northern parts of the country [Harutyunyan, 1997, pp. 111-123; Harutyunyan, 2006, pp. 229-250; Farrokh, 2008, passim; Fry, 2002, pp. 60-88, 135-155, 242 et seq.; Dodgeon-Sliew, 1991, pp. 55-87; Markwart, 1930, passim].
The eighth region, Vaspurakan, is the largest of the fifteen. It was located north of Persarmenia, bordered on the west by Mocha and Korcayk, and on the east by Paitakaran. One might assume that the last area will be mentioned next. However, the author, without violating its consideration of-
page 90
He chose a different approach in order to avoid Ptolemy's inaccuracies.
This orientation is essential for determining the territories of Arsacid Armenia in the middle of the second century AD (when Ptolemy's Geography was written). Ptolemy's description of Armenia descends from north to south. The territory of Armenia, when viewed from north to south, has the following parameters: in the extreme north, the width of the country is almost 300 km, in its middle part - more than 850 km, and in the extreme south - more than 430 km. In fact, the western border of Greater Armenia in the north-south direction stretched for 170 km, and in the extreme east - for 130 km. The middle part of the country in the north-south direction extended for 470 km, i.e. its width is almost two times less than when considering its territory in the west-east direction. That is why the map of Great Armenia compiled by Ptolemy does not correspond to reality. The territory of Armenia has a cuboid shape instead of a diamond shape in Ptolemy [Bagrov, 2004, p. 78; Bronshten, 1988; p. 136-153; Podosinov, 2008, p. 218-222].
However, the mistakes of the ancient historian-geographer do not end there. Thus, Ptolemy placed the Paryardes Mountains, which in Armenian are called the Parkhar Mountains, which are the eastern extension of the Pontic Mountains, in a completely different place. These mountains were located on the northwestern edge of the Kingdom of Greater Armenia, where the country was very close to the Black Sea (Karpyuk, 2010: 61, 118). However, Ptolemy placed the mountains in the very center of Armenia in a direction from southeast to northwest: from the borders of the junction of two regions - Akilisen and Oborden to the region of Syrakene.
In order not to repeat Ptolemy's mistakes, the author of Ashkharatsuyts divides the central and eastern regions of Greater Armenia into three sections: southern, middle, and northern. The royal domain of Ayrarat, although located in the middle zone, was deliberately described at the very end, which emphasized its special political position and high status.
Vaspurakan is followed by Syunik (9th), Artsakh (10th, near Strabo), Paytakaran (11th, near Strabo), and Uti or Utik-near Ptolemy (12th) [Ptol, V, 13, § 13; Strabo, 1960, XI, XIV, 4, 5].
Let's move on to the northern lane of "Ashkharatsuyts". In Greater Armenia, according to Shirakatsi's orientation, the 13th region should have been Taik, and the 14th-Gugark of Strabo) [Strabo, 1960, XI, XIV, 4, 5]. However, the author deviates from his principle of west-east. The answer may lie in political motives, namely: unlike the southern borders, the northern regions were not strategically important, and after the Armenian-Georgian-Alanian war in the first half of the second century BC, there were almost no military clashes in this territory [Strabo, 1960, XI, XIV, 4, 5 History of the Armenian People, 1971, p. 548 et seq.; Melikset-Bek, 1934, p. 158-160].
An error in the sequence of enumeration of regions can also be attributed to the influence of Ptolemy. Thus, the ancient geographer-historian, when describing the territory of Gugark, mentions two areas in the west-east direction-Kotarzene, or Katarzene and Tosarene.
an enumeration. Here, on the territory of Gugark, Ptolemy mentions the region of Obordene, and then-the regions of Arsia Akilisena, Astaunitis and Sophena, located to the west.
It is possible that there were three regions on the territory of Gugark in the time of Strabo and Ptolemy. Then it turns out that there were a total of 20 regions in Greater Armenia. Ptolemy knew that Gugark was divided into two parts: Kotarzene and Tosarene. However, he did not know the name of the entire region, which he called Obordena.
page 91
The last place mentioned in Ashkharatsuyts is the region of Ayrarat, or Basilisene, as already mentioned, without including it in the list of toponyms listed on the west-east principle, the author of Ashkharatsuyts emphasized the special significance of this area. Comparing the Ayrarat of the Ptolemaic map with the Ayrarat "Ashkharatsuyts", it is easy to see that the territory of this region has almost doubled [Ptolemaios, 2006, S. 854-855; Talbert, 2000, p. 1268]. According to Ashkharatsuyts, Ayrarat was divided into 20 provinces. The remaining regions of Armenia consisted of a total of 169 provinces [Yeremyan, 1963(2); Patkanov, 1877, pp. 42-54], in particular, High Armenia-9, Sofena-8, Aldznik-10, Turuberan-16, Mokk-9, Korchayk-11, Persarmenia-9, Vaspurakan - 36, Syunik-12, Artsakh-12, Paytakaran-12, Utik-7, Gukark-9, Taik-9.
This information" Ashkharatsuyts " is at odds with the testimony of Pliny the Elder, who mentioned the existence of 120 strategies on the territory of Greater Armenia. Pliny's information dates back to the establishment of the Artashisid dynasty in Armenia (Artashes I, 189-160 BC) [History of the Armenian people, 1971, p. 836-842]. As for the increase in the number of provinces on the territory of the country (169), this can most likely be explained by such a feature of the early Middle Ages as feudal fragmentation. Armenia, according to many experts, entered the stage of early feudalism at the beginning of the IV century. However, it is hardly possible to assume that almost 70 new provinces were formed in the course of one century. Therefore, it is difficult to consider Ashkharatsuyts as a source exclusively of the fifth century, and it is incorrect to attribute the authorship only to Movses Khorenatsi. In this aspect, I share the point of view of ST. Eremyan and E. L. Danielyan. As for the list of provinces within 15 oblasts, there is no indicative west-east principle. This is explained by the fact that the authors of "Ashkharatsuyts" listed the administrative-territorial formations in chronological order. So, if Khorenatsi mentions the regions formed in the IV-V centuries, then Shirakatsi supplements this list with the regions formed after Khorenatsi (VI-VII centuries).
As noted, Ptolemy listed 19 or 20 regions, and in the Armenian source there are 15 of them. Pliny the Elder mentions that there were 120 strategies in Armenia, and 169 in Ashkharatsuyts. Thus, if the number of provinces decreased (by 4 or 5), then the number of regions or provinces increased by almost 70. The conclusion suggests that the Arsacids in the I—II centuries AD sought to strengthen their power by reducing the number of regions. This process probably ended in the run-up to the fourth century, which is evident from a comparative analysis of Ptolemy's data with those of Movses Khorenatsi and especially Faustos Buzand. Buzand's "history" refers entirely to the events of the fourth century. During this period, the Ptolemaic regions of Akilisene and Astaounitis became provinces. The former regions of Kotarzene and Tosarene merged, and this newly formed administrative-territorial unit was named Gugark. The formation of provinces within regions has accelerated since the fourth century. The situation of regional chiefs became more complicated, as internecine wars broke out between provincial heads [Javakhov, 1905, passim; Krkasharyan, 2005, p.259-295; Manandyan, 1981, p. 187-436; Novoseltsev, 1980, passim; Sargsyan, 1960, passim].
Why did this historical and geographical source have a pronounced west-east orientation? Since the beginning of the second century BC, the eastern direction began to occupy an increasing place in the foreign policy of the Roman Republic. Since the first century BC, this trend has intensified, and the Eastern policy eventually became the determining factor in the foreign policy relations of the Roman Empire. It was then that the city of Rome became the center of world politics. And to the east there were roads originating from the Roman forum.
Before that, the focus of world politics was the East. Therefore, all the paths then had an east-west orientation [Istoriya Drevnogo Vostoka, 2004, pp. 885-890;
page 92
Dandamaev, 2009, pp. 434-435; Schaub and Andersen, 2009, pp. 8-128; Talbert, 2000, p. 18-19]. The Western policy of the Achimenids failed, the eastern policy of the Greek-Macedonians was crowned with success. However, in the Hellenistic period, the focus of world politics remained the East, i.e., the predominance of the Eastern orientation continued.
As Rome confidently took over the reins of power, the center stopped moving in the next five or six centuries. This is confirmed by the "Pevtinger map", where the orientation goes from north to south and from west to east [Braudel, 2002, p. 385 et seq.; Jakson, Kalinina, Konovalova, Podosinov, 2007, p. 13-97; Manandyan, 1984, p. 78-218; Podosinov, 1999, p. 263-267; Podosinov, 2002, pp. 287-378; Talbert, 2000, p. 125 et seq.]. This orientation was followed by the second author of "Ashkharatsuyts" - Anania Shirakatsi, who considered the north to be the beginning of the ecumene, but when describing it was guided by the principle of west-east, who edited, corrected and supplemented this most important monument.
list of literature
Bagrov L. History of Geography, Moscow: Tsntrpoligraf Publ., 2004.
Braudel F. The Mediterranean Sea and the Mediterranean world in the era of Philip II. Part I. The role of the environment. Moscow: Languages of Slavic Culture, 2002.
Bronshten V. A. Claudius Ptolemy. II century AD Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1988.
Dandamaev M. A. Mesopotamia and Iran in the VII-IV centuries BC. Social institutions and ideology. SPb.: SPbU, 2009.
Javakhov I. Gosudarstvennyi stroi Drevnoi Gruzii i Armenii [The State System of Ancient Georgia and Armenia]. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiya imperatorskoy AN, 1905.
Dzhakson T. N., Kalinina T. M., Konovalova I. G., Podosinov A.V. Russkaya reka [Russian river]. Rechnye puti Vostochnoi Evropy v antichnoi i srednevekovoi geografii [River Routes of Eastern Europe in Ancient and Medieval Geography].
Dushkov V. A. Geografiya i psikhologiya [Geography and Psychology]. Approach to the problem, Moscow: Mysl', 1987.
History of the Ancient East. Ot rannykh gosudarstvennykh obrazovanii do drevnykh imperii I [From Early state Institutions to Ancient Empires].
Karpyuk S. G. Klimat i geografiya v chelovecheskom izmerenii (arkhaicheskaja i klassicheskaja Grece) [Climate and Geography in the human dimension (Archaic and classical Greece)].
The African lion. Africa is the third part of the world. Description of Africa and its attractions, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1983.
Movses Khorsnatsi. History of Armenia. Yerevan: Hayastan, 1990 / Translated from drevnearm. G. H. Sarkisyan.
Novoseltsev A. P. Genezis feodalizma v stranakh Zakavkazya (opyt sravnitel'no-istoricheskogo issledovaniya) [Genesis of feudalism in the Transcaucasian countries (experience of comparative historical research)].
Patkanov K. P. Armenian geography of the seventh century A.D. (attributed to Moses of Khorsna). St. Petersburg: Printing House of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, 1877.
Podosinov A. V., Chskin L. S. Review of: The History of Cartography, v. I, Cartography in Prehistoric, Ancient, and Mcdival Europe and the Mediterranean / cd. J. B. Harlcy, D. Woodward. Chicago-London: The University of Chicago Press, 1987 // Bulletin of Ancient History, 1990, No. 3.
Podosinov A.V. Ex Oriente Lux! Orientation by countries of the world in archaic cultures of Eurasia, Moscow: Yazyki russkoy kul'tury, 1999.
Podosinov A.V. Vostochnaya Evropa v rimskoi kartograficheskoi traditsii [Eastern Europe in the Roman Cartographic Tradition].
Podosinov A.V. Review of: Ptolcmaios Handbuch dcr Geographical, Gricchisch-Dcutsch. Tcil 1-2 / / Bulletin of Ancient History, 2008, No. 1.
Sarkisyan G. H. Tigranakert. From the history of Ancient Armenian urban communities, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1960.
Farrokh. The Persians. Army of the Great Kings, Moscow: Eksmo, 2009.
Fry R. Nasledie Irana [Heritage of Iran], Moscow: Nauka Publ., 2002.
Shaub P., Andersen V. Graeco-Persian Wars, Moscow: Yauza-Eksmo, 2009.
Dodgeon-Slicw М.Н. The Roman Eastern Frontier and the Persian Wars A.D. 226-363. L.: Princeton University Press, 1991.
Markwart J. Sudarmenien und die Tigrisquellen nach griechischen und arahischen Geographen. Wicn: Studicn zur Arncnischcn Gcschichtc IV, 1930.
Ptolcmaios Handbuch der Geographic Griechisch-Deutch. T. 2, Buch 5-8, und Indices. Hrsg A. Stuckclbcrgcr etc. Basel: Schwabc Vcrlag, 2006.
Strabo. The Geography of Strabo. L.: Harvard Univer. Press, 1960.
Talbert R.J.A. Atlas of the Greek and Roman World. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000.
page 93
IN ARMENIAN
Anania Shirakatsi / Paul rsd. Abramyan A. G., Pstrosiana G. B. Yerevan: Sovstakan grokh Publ., 1979.
Arutyunyan A. Zh. Southern regions of Armenia in the IV century. Beirut: Antilias Publ., 1997.
Harutyunyan A. J. Graniny Arshakidskoy Armenii po sravleniya "Istorii Armenii" Faustos Buzand [Arshakid Armenian granites according to the "History of Armenia" by Faustos Buzand]. Vienna Yerevan: Mkhitaryan Publ., 2006.
Danislyan E. L., Mslkonyan A. A. History of Armenia. Yerevan: Zangak Publ., 2007.
Yersmyan S. T. Map of Armenia by "Ashkharatsuyts". Yerevan: Academy of Sciences of the Armenian SSR, 1963.
Istoriya armyanskogo naroda [History of the Armenian people], vol. I. Armenia in the era of the primitive communal and slave-owning system. Yersmyana S. T. Yerevan: Academy of Sciences of the Armenian SSR, 1971.
Krkasharyan SEE State structure of Ancient Armenia (VI century BC-IV century AD). Yerevan: Lusakn, 2005.
Manandyan Ya. A. Trudy [Proceedings]. Vol. IV. Yerevan: Academy of Sciences of the Armenian SSR, 1981.
Manandyan Ya. A. Trudy [Proceedings]. T. V. Yerevan: Academy of Sciences of the Armenian SSR, 1984.
Msliksst-Bsk L. Georgian sources about Armenia and Armenians (V-XII centuries). Vol. 1. Yerevan: Mslkonyan Foundation, 1934.
page 94
New publications: |
Popular with readers: |
News from other countries: |
![]() |
Editorial Contacts |
About · News · For Advertisers |
![]() 2014-2025, LIBMONSTER.COM is a part of Libmonster, international library network (open map) Keeping the heritage of the United States of America |