서기 3~4세기 로마와 페르시아 접경의 아르메니아 왕국: 지정학적 관점에서 본 아르메니아 왕국의 그리스도교화

반기현 한국서양고대역사문화학회 2019 서양고대사연구 Vol.54 No.-

이 연구는 3세기 후반에서 4세기 초 로마 제국과 사산조 페르시아(Sassanid Persia) 제국의 접경지대(contact zone)에 위치했던 아르사케스조 아르메니아 왕국(Arsacid Armenia)을 다룬다. 특히, 아르메니아 역사에서 가장 중요한 전환점으로 여겨지는 ‘그리스도교화(Christianisation)’의 문제를 기존의 교회사적인 관점이나 민족주의적인 관점이 아닌, 현실정치의 영역인 지정학(Geopolitics)의 관점에서 재조명한다. 4세기 초 아르메니아의 티리다테스 대왕(Tiridates the Great)은 성 그레고리오스(St. Gregory)에게 세례를 받고 그리스도교를 국교로 정하여 아르메니아를 최초의 그리스도교 국가로 만들었다. 최초의 아르메니아 역사가인 동시에 교회사가인 아가탄겔로스(Agathangelos), 모세스(Moses of Khorene), 파우스투스(Faustus)는 이 사건을 문학적 수사를 동원하여 신화적으로 묘사했다. 따라서 이들의 기록이 갖는 사료적 한계와 문제점을 바로잡아 3세기 후반 아르메니아의 연대기를 보다 사실에 가깝게 재구성하였고, 티리다테스가 그리스도를 받아들인 시기와 세례 받은 시기, 국교화를 선언한 시기를 구별함으로써 그 의미를 명확히 하였으며, 국교화가 그레고리오스에게 감화된 왕의 독자적인 선택이었는지 아니면 로마와 페르시아 간 지정학과 내부 권력구조를 고려한 판단이었는지 고찰하였다. 아르메니아 왕국은 252년 페르시아의 샤푸르 1세(Shapur I)에게 정복당했으나 278년 로마의 프로부스(Probus) 황제의 도움으로 서부 아르메니아를 되찾고 코스로브 2세(Khorsrov II)가 왕위에 올랐다. 이후 298년 사탈라 전투(battle of Satala)에서 로마가 페르시아에 승리하여 니시비스 평화조약(Treaty of Nisibis)을 맺으면서 아르메니아를 완전히 되찾았고 디오클레티아누스 황제의 후원으로 티리다테스 4세(훗날 대왕)가 왕위에 올랐다. 그는 현실적으로 로마의 눈치를 볼 수밖에 없는 상황이었기 때문에 이전부터 그레고리오스와의 교류를 통해 그리스도를 알았음에도 불구하고 갈레리우스(Galerius)의 그리스도교 관용령(Edict of Toleration)이 선포되고 디오클레티아누스가 사망한 311년까지는 로마의 반 그리스도교적 정책을 지지하고 협조하는 것처럼 행동해야 했다. 한편 사산조 페르시아에서는 조로아스터교 사제장 카르티르(Kartir)가 황제의 권력을 등에 업고 3세기 내내 공격적인 포교활동을 벌여 마니를 살해하는 등 이교도들을 박해했다. 그 과정에서 많은 그리스도교도들 또한 희생됐다. 티리다테스의 입장에서는 페르시아로부터 반 조로아스터교적인 세력을 흡수하고 로마로부터 그리스도교 세력을 흡수함으로써 독자적인 세력을 키울 수 있는 여건이 성숙되고 있었다. 311년 티리다테스 대왕은 친 그리스도교 정책으로 선회했다. 그레고리오스는 그간의 공로를 인정받아 314년 카이사레아 주교로부터 서임을 받았다. 티리다테스는 더 나아가 그레고리오스에게 세례를 받고 그리스도교가 아르메니아의 국교임을 선언했다. 그리스도교도들의 입장에서 로마는 여전히 이교도 제국이었고, 페르시아는 조로아스터교 제국이었다. 티리다테스 대왕은 그리스도교도들의 수호자임을 내세워 로마와 페르시아 접경지대의 그리스도교 세력과 아직 태도를 명확히 하지 못한 많은 이교의 제후들, 즉 낙사라르(naxarar)들까지 모두 포용했다. 이러한 프로파간다로 아르메니아의 국론을 통합하고 왕권 강화에 성공해 330년까지 로마와 페르시아의 접경지대에서 성... This study explores the late 3rd to early 4th century geopolitics of Arsacid Armenia, which was situated in the contact zone between the Roman empire and Sassanid Persia. From the perspective of geopolitics I try to shed new light on the Christianization of Armenia in particular, which has been considered the great transition in the history of the Armenians. This has been researched mainly from ecclesiastical and nationalistic viewpoints. Tiridates the Great, king of Armenia, was baptized by St. Gregory and then proclaimed Christianity as the state religion of Armenia in the early 4th century. The first Armenian and Church historians Agathangelos, Moses of Khorene, and Faustus legendized the event in a hagiography with literary topos or rhetoric. I have therefore corrected their accounts and complemented those with the Roman and Persian sources to restructure the late 3rd century-chronology of Armenia as a historical setting for the Christianization. I have classified the times of the conversion, baptism, and establishment to clarify each implication. I have carefully investigated Tiridates’ proclamation of the Christianization to know whether it was a decision that was deeply influenced by St. Gregory or made in considering external geopolitics and internal power structure. In 252 the kingdom of Armenia was conquered by Shapur I, šāhanšāh(king of kings) of the Sassanid Persia, and annexed to it, but in 278 the Roman emperor Probus restored the western part of Armenia and crowned Khorsrov II as king of Armenia. In 298 the Roman caesar Galerius won the crucial victory over the Persian šāhanšāh Narseh at the battle of Satala, and the treaty of Nisibis between the augustus Diocletian and Narseh ended the war and restored the entire kingdom of Armenia. Diocletian crowned his cliens Tiridates IV(later the Great) as king of Armenia. Despite his acknowledgment of Gregory and of the god of Christianity, the client king of Rome had to have supported and cooperated with the anti-Christian policy of his patronus by 311, when the Edict of Toleration was issued by now augustus Galerius and the retired emperor Diocletian had passed away. In the meanwhile the Zoroastrian priest Kartir in Sassanid Persia ambitiously reformed Zoroastrianism with the aim of establishing it as state religion and aggressively persecuted other religions there such as Manichaeism, Buddhism, and Christianity. He even killed Mani and many Christians. The favourable geopolitical situations were ripening for Tiridates to consolidate his independent and sovereign position by accepting the anti-Zoroastrians from Persia and the pro-Christians from Rome. In 311 Tiridates the Great embraced a pro-Christian policy. In 314 St. Gregory was consecrated by Leontius of Caesarea due to his successful missionary work in Armenia. Tiridates the Great went further to be baptized by St. Gregory and he proclaimed Christianity as state religion of Armenia. Still, in the view of Christians, the Roman empire stayed pagan, and Persia was the empire of Zoroastrianism. Tiridates propagating himself as guardian of Christianity, attempted to embrace all the local Christian authorities who resided in the contact zones between Rome and Persia, as well as the pagan naxarars(lords, princes, vassals and local elites etc.). He succeeded in enhancing national consolidation and royal authority, and his kingdom was prospering by 330 between the two super powers. His establishment of Christianity as the state religion of Armenia was the paramount geostrategic decision in terms of geopolitics.

터키의 아제르바이잔과 아르메니아 외교 관계 및 딜레마

김대성(Dae Sung, Kim) 한국중동학회 2011 韓國 中東 學會 論叢 Vol.31 No.3

Caucasus region became an important political space for diplomatic relations and energy policy of Turkey after the breakdown of former USSR in 1991. With the collapse of former USSR, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia could be an independent country and appear on international diplomatic stage. These three countries gave chances and clashes at the same time to Turkey because of different geopolitical and economic interests among these countries. The politicians and diplomats of Turkey were burdened with specially coordinating the different geostrategic and economic interests between Azerbaijan and Armenia. Azerbaijan and Armenia have different relationships with Turkey and Russia. While Armenia has been supported from Russia after 1991, Azerbaijan, which has clearly expressed nationalistic tendency, has been shaken conflicts with Armenia for controlling the Nagorno-Karabakh region. Turkey has used the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh for pressing Armenia to turnover to Azerbaijan. The pipeline project-BTC pipelines- which will transport gas and oil from Baku to Ceyhan through Tbilisi laid the foundations for economic partnership among Turkey, Azerbaijan and Georgia. Turkey is leading partner in implementing BTC pipeline projects. Through BTC pipeline projects, these three countries can easily cooperate in economic and diplomatic relationships. But Armenia which has antagonistic relationship with Azerbaijan is uncomfortable toward BTC pipeline. In spite of bad diplomatic relationships between Azerbaijan and Aremenia, Turkey has tried to mend ties with Armenia to enhance Turkey's geopolitical stature in the Caucasus region. In the end, the future of Turkey's diplomatic relationship with Azerbaijan and Armenia depends on settling the conflicts of Nagorno-Karabakh.

아르메니아에서의 언어문제 연구

정경택 한국슬라브어학회 2015 슬라브어연구 Vol.20 No.2

The decline of status of the Russian language is common phenomenon throughout the Post Soviet New Independent States. In particular, it is a consequent measure in Armenia, the 158 슬라브어 연구 제 20권 2호number and proportion of whose Russian people are least among the 15 Soviet Republics, not bordered on Russian Federation. But because of its geopolitic and economic situation and social-cultural necessities (demands) the status of Russian language has been improved again since the mid-1990s. A current expansion of Armenian-Russian bilingualism in Armenia is the cause of revitalization of economic and politic, cultural, academic exchanges between Armenia and Russian Federation. Also Armenia is besieged by Islamic influence and Turkic nationality. Several massacres by Turkish people from the end of the 19th century to the beginning of the 20th century and a territorial dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan have sought to strengthen the ties with Russian Federation, thus these ties are very important to survival of Armenian people and its state. But it is natural that independent and homogeneous Armenia has restricted use of Russian language. Moreover the level of Russian language skill has fallen, Armenian was the state language in Soviet Armenia. The situation of Russian language in Armenia is different from case of other states, for example, Russian speakers (including Russian minority) comprise 25% of the total population in Ukraine, Russians comprise 25% in Kazakhstan and Russians stand the third depending on their population in Kyrgyzstan. But Russian minority thinks that preservation and development of Russian language is possible in Armenian educational system without provoking the Armenian national sentiment. The command of Russian is the first requirement for Armenian people because Armenians are working as immigrant workers in Russia and their professions are sponsored by Russian companies. Russian language is spoken on the whole in republic, but it does not have the official status. Accordingly, Russian community claims the amendment and flexibility of Law on Language that has discriminative contents.

Pashinyan's Gambit or Armenia's Failed Revolution

ABADJIAN, VAHRAM Academia Via Serica 2020 Acta Via Serica Vol.5 No.1

The article is a critical examination of the political developments in Armenia since the 'Velvet Revolution' of April-May 2018, when, on the wave of massive protests against the ruling regime, new young forces came to power raising amongst broad segments of population enormous enthusiasm and hopes about radical reforms that would lead to profound transformations in the political and socio-economic spheres. It contains a thorough analysis of underlying political processes in the country in an attempt to answer a number of topical questions, so important to get a deeper understanding of the situation in Armenia and in the South Caucasus region. Based on the analysis of the new authorities' performance against the acknowledged benchmarks and standards of democracy consolidation, such as: separation of powers, independence of the judiciary, good governance, transitional justice the author comes to the conclusion that they failed to achieve any breakthrough in the above-mentioned fields. On the contrary, as demonstrated by concrete examples, what occurred in Armenia was not a revolution but a mere regime change under the leadership of Prime Minister Pashinyan, who gradually has concentrated in his hands executive, legislative, and quasi-totality of the judicial branch of power.

The EU`s Two-Track Promotion of Democracy in its Eastern Neighbourhood: Examining the Case of Armenia1

( Nicholas Ross Smith ) 한국EU학회 2012 Asia-Pacific Journal of EU Studies Vol.10 No.1

This paper examines the EU`s effectiveness in promoting democracy in its Eastern Neighbourhood through engaging with the case study of Armenia. In evoking Pridham`s two-track approach to democratization, the EU`s democratic strategy in its European Neighbourhood Policy is evaluated through empirically examining electoral reform (2008 presidential election) and EU interaction with domestic civil society organizations (specifically domestic NGOs) in Armenia. Ultimately, it is argued that the EU represents an inefficient agent of democratization through the European Neighbourhood Policy, comparatively to previous neighbourhood strategies which were based on enlargement, where reform is now more modest and the EU`s mechanisms and strategies require longer scope and application.

아르싸흐 공화국의 언어상황 연구

정경택 한국러시아문학회 2019 러시아어문학 연구논집 Vol.66 No.-

The Nagorno-Karabakh region, which belonged to Azerbaijan SSR during the Soviet period declared its independence as the Republic of Artsakh in 1991. Currently, the region is internationally regarded as Azerbaijani territory, but in reality it is a part of Armenia. Therefore, Armenian language policies are applied, and Armenian language is defined as a state language. Even though the Azerbaijani population of Nagorno-Karabakh and the number of Azerbaijani speakers have increased during the Soviet period, the Armenians have not learned and used Azerbaijani language. This becomes the basis for Russian language to maintain its solid position as a lingua franca in the Nagorno-Karabakh region. Also, Russian language is a required subject for all Artsakh’s higher education institutions, secondary and general education institutions just like in Armenia. It is because the Azerbaijan war from 1991 to 1994 was virtually supported by Russia, and Armenia recognized Russia as its most important volunteer and protector. In the Republic of Armenia, Russian is regarded as a language of communication among ethnic minorities, and the use of Russian language continues to be active.

러시아 제국 주변부에서의 혁명: 아르메니아 민족주의와 단명한 아르메니아공화국

강윤희 서울대학교 러시아연구소 2017 러시아연구 Vol.27 No.2

This paper explores the effect of the Russian Revolution of 1917 on the periphery of the Russian Empire, focusing on the case of Armenia. Armenia, situated in the Southern Caucasus, achieved independence in 1918 during the Russian Civil War, but it could last only for three years. In 1920, the Armenian government had to agree on the transfer of power to the Revolutionary Committee, resulting in the Sovietization of Armenia. After looking into the socio-economic conditions of Armenians and their political landscape, this paper deals with the birth and the fall of the first Republic of Armenia in the period 1917-1920. In doing so, the paper highlights the external and internal factors that contributed to the demise of the Armenian Republic. These factors include the Turkish offensive that the Armenian army could not withstand and the nationalist stance of the Armenian Republic that prevented timely reconciliation with the Bolsheviks. 본 연구는 1917년 러시아혁명이 러시아제국 주변부에 어떠한 영향을 미쳤는지를 아르메니아의 사례를 통해 살펴본다. 코카서스 지역에 거주하던 아르메니아인들은 러시아 혁명이 주는 기회를 살려 아르메니아공화국을 수립하고 러시아로부터 독립하였다. 그러나 아르메니아공화국은 불과 2년 반 정도만 존속하였을 뿐, 1920년 볼셰비키 세력에 의해 소비에트화 된다. 본 연구에서는 1917년 러시아 혁명 발발 전후의 아르메니아 역사를 살펴봄으로써 왜 아르메니아공화국이 단명할 수밖에 없었는지에 대한 해답을 찾고자 한다. 이를 위해 본 논문의 2장에서는 혁명 이전까지의 아르메니아인들의 사회경제적 상황과 정치적 지형을 살펴볼 것이며, 3장에서는 1917년부터 1920년까지의 아르메니아공화국의 정치적 특성과 아르메니아인들이 당시 직면했던 국내외 문제들을 살펴볼 것이다. 러시아혁명 전후의 아르메니아 역사는 아르메니아인들이 왜 민족주의에 경도되었으며 이것이 그들의 정세판단과 정책에 어떠한 영향을 미쳤는지를 잘 보여줄 것이다.

파라자노프 영화의 다문화성 -<석류의 빛깔>과 아르메니아-

이현숙 ( Hyun Suk Lee ) 한양대학교 현대영화연구소 2012 현대영화연구 Vol.8 No.2

Serigei Paradjanov`s was a prominent Armenian director in 1960`s Soviet Union. Paradjanov was born and grew in Old Tiflis. In this city there lived many people of different nationality. Paradjanov was familiar with this cosmopolitan atmosphere and many different cultures. His father Iosif Paradjanov was a merchant dealt with the antiques. Paradjanov inherited esthetic sense from his father. Paradjanov was interested with ``ethnic culture`` and he realized the culture and folklore of Caucasian countries in his films. In these works he invented many new creative devices. <The Color of Pomegranates> is the most ``paradjanovskii`` film in this context. Sayat-Nova was Armenian poet of the medieval times. He wrote the poem in three language-Georgian, Armenian, Azerbaijan and his poem was loved by caucasian people today. <The Color of Pomegranates> was based on superb knowledge of Armenian tradition and its ancient art. While representing the life and passion of the Poet in his screen, Paradjanov revived traditional folk art of Armenia. The screen of <The Color of Pomegranates> was full of armenian traditional details-ancient architectures, monasteries, miniatures, folk art, etc. For the purpose of reproducing these materials effectively he got the device ``collage``, which is connected with Byzantine art and Old Tiflis painting school. In this way Paradjanov symbolized these ethnic materials in <The Color of Pomegranates>, showed the extraordinary art film to the world and through this unique film Paradjanov gaved ``the most beautiful present`` his homeland Armenia.

모제품 깔개에 표현된 "S" 기호에 관한 연구

윤양노 ( Yang No Yoon ) 중앙아시아학회 2011 中央아시아硏究 Vol.16 No.-

The signals presented on rugs and fabric, even if they are in the same form, have different symbolic meanings according to the regions in which they are used, produced and different ethnic groups live. This research assumed that the ``S`` presented on a certain rug has certain meaning but not a simple one. And investigated the form of expression, regional characteristic, feature of the time, meaning of use of ``S`` through examining literatures and samples which are related to the woolen rug produced between twelve and nineteen centuries in the Middle East. The research findings are as follows. First, the signs presented on domestic animals of nomads, presented by each tribe, are for showing ownership of the animals. In contrast, the ``S`` presented on rugs fabrics can be referred to a sort of brand mark, which is related to copy right, rather than ownership. Second, the expression form of ``S`` can be classified into three forms: graphing of vine of grape tree which refers to Christ, ``S`` presented on its own and presented between various patterns hidden in them. Continuous representations are shown in rugs of religious painting, which have been presented between the Middle and Gothic Ages. The single representation, which is presented repetitively or in a single form on particular section on the rug. And the hidden form is shown on rugs which have been produced after nineteen century and this can be found with circumspection as some patterns are presented negatively seems to be done intentionally. Third, the rugs which ``S`` is presented on have been produced in Armenian region or the one belonged to Armenia historically in which Armenia`s florescence. It is assumed that the ``S``, presented on the rugs, refers towhich is the first letter of ````, the god of Armenia, as a symbolization. Fourth, the ``S``, in this research, referred to dragon assuming based on Persian carpet and dragon of China interpreting generally. However, the ``S`` still refers to Christ for Armenian people that they tired to confirm their ethnic identity through their religion. Apart from the ``S``, there are many sorts of special sings presented on the woolen rug for this research. Therefore, this paper can be a very critical basis for further research which are to investigate the signals presented on fabric and their ethnic identity, the sort of weaving technique and characteristic.

파라자노프 영화의 다문화성: <석류의 빛깔>과 아르메니아

이현숙 한양대학교 현대영화연구소 2012 현대영화연구 Vol.8 No.2

Serigei Paradjanov’s was a prominent Armenian director in 1960's Soviet Union. Paradjanov was born and grew in Old Tiflis. In this city there lived many people of different nationality. Paradjanov was familiar with this cosmopolitan atmosphere and many different cultures. His father Iosif Paradjanov was a merchant dealt with the antiques. Paradjanov inherited esthetic sense from his father. Paradjanov was interested with 'ethnic culture' and he realized the culture and folklore of Caucasian countries in his films. In these works he invented many new creative devices. <The Color of Pomegranates> is the most 'paradjanovskii' film in this context. Sayat-Nova was Armenian poet of the medieval times. He wrote the poem in three language - Georgian, Armenian, Azerbaijan and his poem was loved by caucasian people today. <The Color of Pomegranates> was based on superb knowledge of Armenian tradition and its ancient art. While representing the life and passion of the Poet in his screen, Paradjanov revived traditional folk art of Armenia. The screen of <The Color of Pomegranates> was full of armenian traditional details - ancient architectures, monasteries, miniatures, folk art, etc. For the purpose of reproducing these materials effectively he got the device 'collage', which is connected with Byzantine art and Old Tiflis painting school. In this way Paradjanov symbolized these ethnic materials in <The Color of Pomegranates>, showed the extraordinary art film to the world and through this unique film Paradjanov gaved 'the most beautiful present' his homeland Armenia.