დიმიტრი უზნაძე მითრიდატე VI ევპატორზე. DIMITRI UZNADZE ON MITHRIDATES VI EUPATOR

Abstract

Dimitri Uznadze’s contribution to the historical science has long been in the focus of our research. The issue had not been studied thoroughly, and we tried to fill this gap. Neglect of the given issue was not a mere coincidence. This neglect is not purely academic. It had obvious political reasons. Above all, it was due to the negative attitude to the success of the Georgian Democratic Republic in the years 1918-1921. Such attitude was based on ideology and politics. Currently, this attitude is outdated and forms a kind of retro in historiography. In our opinion, it is quite natural that the most fruitful and intense activities of Dimitri Uznadze in the historical field coincided with the existence of the Georgian Democratic Republic in the years 1918-1921. Prior to the establishing of the Soviet regime in Georgia, Dimitri Uznadze taught world history at school. He actively participated in the creation of the first national manuals of world history for school children. Although the quantity of his works in history is insignifi cant, the quality is extremely valuable. We should envisage this criterion in our research. This small number of works was all he could create in the extreme circumstances in a short period of time. Dimitri Uznadze studied the world history based on three main directions. His studies were chiefl y reflected in school manuals. He simply had no time to implement most of his brilliant ideas. The above-mentioned three directions are as follows: 1. Ancient history. The prehistoric era and the history of the ancient orient. 2. Antique history. The history of ancient Greece and Rome. 3. Recent history. He wrote this manual together with Ivane Gvelesiani. It is higly probable that he had also written a school manual on the medieval history, but failed to publish it. The given paper is of historiographic nature. It aims to find out how Dimitri Uznadze described the activities of Mithridates VI Eupator in the first national manual on the History of Rome. In our opinion, Dimitri Uznadze’s evaluation of Mithridates VI Eupator in his school manual on the history of Rome has the following positive aspects: 1. The author speaks briefly and laconically about the history of the Kingdom of Pontus prior to the reign of Mithridates VI Eupator. The description provides an important historical background for the coverage of the main issue. The author analyzes both the history of Rome and the ancient history of the Kartvelian tribes. 2. Another merit of the manual is the correct evaluation of the activities of Mithridates VI Eupator. The author reveals a thorough knowledge of the empirical material. The manual performs a mission of a cultural trigger, and the author has achived this goal successfully. Dimitri Uznadze contributed to the promotion of the given issue. This was a significant step forward, taking into account the Georgian reality of the given period. 3. Dimitri Uznadze’s attitude to the activities of Mithridates VI Eupator fully corresponds to the strict requirements of the historical science of the given period. Dimitri Uznadze shared a widespread scholarly opinion. Hence, he did not praise the King of Pontus. This can be explained by the influence of the Roman sources. 4. Another merit of the manual is Dimitri Uznadze’s knowledgeability of the issue. This is not surprising, because the author was well aware of the empirical, factual material. Analysis of certain issues given in the manual has revealed certain shortcomings, namely: 1. The manual does not provide detailed information regarding the acute opposition between the Kingdom of Pontus and Rome. In fact, the author does not mention the three wars between Mithridates and Rome. The information regarding the issue in overly general and lacks concrete facts. 2. Another shortcoming of this passage is the author’s indifference to facts. He fails to mention the dates of the three wars with Rome. He does not provide the dates of battles with Chaeronea and Orchomenus. It would have been extremely useful to provide this information in the school manual.