PROBLEM OF CIVILIZATION HOMEOSTASIS IN GREAT ARMENIA – 2010-3

Part III. Efforts for Homogenic Equilibrum under Artavazd II

Summary

Albert A. Stepanyan
A stereotype on this crucial period of history of Great Armenia is obvious im modern articles and monographs. It considers the country as a minor partner of her powerful neighbours, Rome and Parthia. Consequently, all events of her history are viewed as results of their direct or indirect influence.

An attempt to break this superstition has been undertaken in this paper. Profound economic, social and religious metamorphoses of the Armenian society have been illuminated. This gave opportunity to appreciate the rule of Artavazd II from “inner dimensions” of Great Armenia. In dangers and instabilities of Parthian campaigns of M.Crassus and M.Antonius, the king tended to keep identical (amical) relations both with East (Parthia) and West (Rome). However, he followed this complementary policy with rigour and neglected the necessity of compromises. It brought his reign to failure.

King Artavazd was captured and executed by M.Antonius. Despite this negative experience, complementary policy and civilization choice must be appreciated as one of more important elements of social homeostasis of the Armenians during centuries.

bertstepanyan@yahoo.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.