Note 53 — Chapter IV · A New Interpretation

The most elaborate recent study of the policy of Augustus towards Armenia is by A. Abbruzzese, “Le relazioni fra l’impero romano e l’Armenia a tempo di Augusto”, Riv. di storia antica, VII (1903), pp. 505-21; 721-34; VIII (1904), pp. 32-61 (also separate, Padova, 1903). His attitude towards the diplomatic policy which Augustus followed is, however, hypercritical, and his thesis that a policy of economic absorption should have been followed is illusory. (Cf. De Sanctis, Riv. di filol. LIII (1905), p. 159 f.). A fairly satisfactory statement, though somewhat superficial, is P. P. Asdourian’s dissertation, Die politischen Beziehungen zwischen Armenien und Rom von 190 v. Chr. bis 428 n. Chr., Venedig, 1911. His statement, p. 79, of the policy of Augustus as one that attempted to maintain the controlling position in Armenia by peaceful means, or through political manoeuvers, is correct enough, but the sneering remark that this was due not to Augustus’ own inclination, but rather to the rivalry of Parthia is quite superfluous. Of course Rome’s relations to Armenia would have been quite different had there not been a powerful Parthian monarchy. In the mutual rivalries of Rome and Parthia lay the whole difficulty. The best general statement of the problem in its large outlines is in V. Chapot, La frontière de l’Euphrate etc., p. 377 ff. He also can make nothing out of Abbruzzese’s “lotta commerciale” theory (p. 382, note). Mommsen’s statement (Röm. Gesch., V, p. 370 ff.) of the general course of Augustus’ Armenian policy is admirable.