Suchergebnisse

This article covers the issues of the historical geography of Sogd, which has repeatedly become the center of world civilization in the past. The author, relying on archaeological data and written sources, made clarifications in the problem on the basis of existing scientific and historical literature. He made a comparative analysis of existing specific approaches and theories on the historical geography of Sogd. As a result of the carried outresearch, the author concludes that the border of Sogd as a country in the early Iron Age could be limited to the Bukhara oasis in the West, the Gisisar mountains in the East, the lower reaches of the Kashkadarya in the south andthe Kukhitang hills as well asthe Nurota mountains in the North.

For the first time in historiography, we have made an attempt to consider the historical geography of the region of Lycaonia, which was located on the territory of the modern peninsula of Asia Minor. This area can be called the «Forgotten Territory», since so far not a single scientist has turned to the study of this important part of Asia Minor (except for articles in encyclopedias). Despite the fact that Lycaonia never had its own statehood, from ancient times it played an important role in the relations of the great powers of the ancient world. Comparing the data of «Ancient Armenian Geography («Ashkharatsuyts»/«Աշխարհացույց»), first of all, with the data of Strabo and Ptolemy, we found out how the boundaries of this region have changed in relation to neighboring states. Consideration of the issue of the territory of Lycaonia is possible on the basis of identifying and studying the orography and hydrography of this region. At the same time, «Ashkharatsuyts» Lycaonia should be compared with the description of this country by Strabo and Ptolemy, and also, in part, with the descriptions of Pliny and other ancient authors (in particular, Herodotus and Xenophon). We analytically examined the issues of urbanization, about which the historian-geographer Claudius Ptolemy presented detailed information. The study of this text requires a hermeneutic approach. It is necessary to analyze literally every word of this message in order to obtain the desired result, which we tried to do in our study within the framework of this article.

Introduction. Until now, the issue of four Byzantine (Justinian) Armenias in historiography has been considered according to the data of the Byzantine historian of the 6th century Procopius of Caesarea, which does not give grounds for a final answer to the questions posed. Analysis. When comparing the data of Procopius with the information of "Ashkharatsuyts" ("Ancient Armenian Geography"), we find many discrepancies (especially when considering the contour of the borders of I, II and III Armenias). According to the "Ancient Armenian Geography", the territory of I Armenia was expanded both at the expense of the other two, and at the expense of Cilicia and northwestern Syria. Results. So, under Emperor Justinian, a new defensive line was created, which we for the first time in historiography called the "Mamikonyan line". One can rely on the information of Ashkharatsuyts almost without hesitation, since this work was written in the 5th – 7th centuries, and the lion's share of the information was supplemented by the second author of the work, Anania Shirakatsi (it is convincingly proven that the first author was the father of Armenian historiography, Movses Khorenatsi). Justinian trusted the Mamikonyan family, being convinced that they had previously faithfully served the kings of Greater Armenia, the Arshakids, and was practically not mistaken in his calculations.

Yahudiye genel manada Yahudilerin yaşadığı bölge veya Yahudi ülkesi anlamlarında kullanılan coğrafi bir terimdir. Terimin kökeni İsrail'in on iki kabilesinden biri olan Yehuda kabilesinin ismine dayanmaktadır. Köken itibariyle etnik bir kelime olan bahsi geçen terim, yaklaşık M.Ö. 930 yılında I. İsrail Krallığı'nın ikiye bölünmesinin ardından coğrafi ve idari bir anlama karşılık gelen bir kelime haline bürünmüştür. Zira I. İsrail Krallığı'nın ikiye bölünmesiyle bu devletin güney kısmını oluşturan topraklar üzerinde Yehuda Krallığı (Mamleket Yehuda) kurulmuş ve bir kabile ismi olan terim coğrafi ve idari bir kullanımı karşılar hale gelmiştir. Bu isim Grek ve Latin eserlerinde Ioudaia ve Iudaea olarak geçmektedir. Yahudiye teriminin coğrafi ve idari bir anlamı karşılayan bir terime dönüşmesinin ardından eskiçağ tarihi dâhilinde Pers (Ahameniş), Helen ve Roma idaresi ve tesiri altında dahi coğrafi bir terim olarak kullanılmaya devam edilmiştir. M.S. II. yüzyılda, Roma hâkimiyeti altında siyasi sebeplerle bu terimin resmi kullanımına son verilmiştir. Ancak Yahudiye terimi, XX. yüzyılda modern İsrail Devleti'nin Batı Şeria olarak adlandırılan bölge için Yahudiye ve Samarya Bölgesi ismini kullanmaya başlamasıyla yeniden gündeme gelmiştir. Bu çalışmada, Yahudiye teriminin eskiçağ tarihi içerisinde ortaya çıkışı, kullanımı, terimin kapsadığı coğrafi bölgenin sınırları ve bu sınırların değişimi incelenmiştir. Ayrıca Yahudiye'nin önemli coğrafi ve demografik özellikleri tespit edilmeye çalışılmıştır.

In the «Ancient Armenian Geography» (or «Ashkharatsuyts», literal translation – «The World Show») among all Asian countries, the 35th authors of this work mention India, which the above-mentioned source represents as a single, whole and finally unified state. The aim of the authors of «Ashkharatsuyts» (Movses of Khorene and Ananias of Shirak) is not to describe or analyze the historical development of the Indian state from beginning to end. For them the most important and top priority is to acquaint the reader with this exotic country as a whole. The authors describe not only borders (from the extreme north to the south of the country), but also pay great attention to orography, hydrography, nature, beliefs, minerals, customs and traditions of the country's inhabitants. Unfortunately, there are no detailed references to the administrative-territorial divisions that we find in «Ashkharatsuyts», when describing almost all other countries of the then known to the authors of the world. The source details the natural resources and wealth of early and ancient India, there is much information about incense. The «Ashkharatsuyts» is supplemented with information about India, which we can extract from such famous works as Strabo's «Geography» and Claudius Ptolemy's «Geography». The most important mention of the Armenian primary source, in our opinion, is a testimony about the island of Taproban, the location of which is still disputed. According to the «Ashkharatsuyts», it corresponds to the modern Sri Lanka (or Lanka). In description of India the first author of the «Ancient Armenian Geography» the historian Movses of Khorene adheres to his former style of exposition (not to submit information already mentioned in another work). In his «History of Armenia» author refers to those issues of India that are not mentioned in the «Ancient Armenian Geography». Comparing these data, we can come to the conclusion that India in those distant times, as well as now, was a mighty and peace-loving power, one of the main factors of international politics. ; В «Древнеармянской географии» (или «Ашхарацуйце»; дословный перевод – «Показ мира») среди всех стран Азии 35-ой авторами этого труда упоминается Индия, которую высшеназванный источник представляет как единое целое и окончательно объединенное государство. Целью авторов «Ашхарацуйца» (Мовсес Хоренаци и Анания Ширакаци) не является описание или анализ исторического пути развития индийского государства от начала до конца. Их первоочередная задача знакомить читателя с этой экзотической страной в целом. Авторы описывают не только границы страны (с крайнего севера до юга), но и уделяют большое внимание орографии, гидрографии, полезным ископаемым, живой природе, верованиям, обычаям и традициям жителей страны. К сожалению, мы не находим развернутых упоминаний об административно-территориальных делениях, которые мы находим в «Ашхарацуйце» при описании других стран в то время известного авторам мира. В источнике подробно рассмотрены природные ресурсы и богатства ранней и древней Индии, в часности, сведений о ладане. Своими упоминаниями «Ашхарацуйц» дополняет сведения об Индии, которые мы можем извлечь из таких известных трудов, как «География» Страбона и «География» Клавдия Птолемея. Важнейшим упоминанием армянского первоисточника, на наш взгляд, является свидетельство об острове Тапробана, о местонахождении которого до сих пор идут споры. По «Ашхарацуйцу», он соответствует современной Шри Ланке. Что касается первого автора «Древнеармянской географии» Мовсеса Хоренаци, то при описании Индии он придерживается своего прежнего стиля изложения (не повторять сведения, уже упомянутые им в другом труде). В своей «Истории Армении» он обращается к тем вопросам об Индии, о которых не упоминается в «Древнеармянской географии». Сопоставляя эти данные, мы можем прийти к выводу, что Индия в те далекие времена, равно как и сейчас, была мощной и миролюбивой державой, одним из главных факторов международной политики.