III. Ghazar P'arpets'i
Information on dayeakut'iwn and
child custody in the fifth century is found in the History of
Armenia by Ghazar P'arpets'i. P'arpets'i himself, about whom little
is known, seems to have been raised by Mamikonean and/or Artsrunid
dayeaks (35). He wrote his work in the late fifth century
as a panegyric to the Mamikonean family generally and specifically
to glorify Vardan Mamikonean (d. 450/51) and the latter's nephew
Vahan (d. Early 500s), the leaders of two anti-Iranian uprisings
in Armenia.
P'arpets'I's History contains
eight references and allusions pertinent to this study. In the
first reference, P'arpets'I describes the impression made on the
Armenian naxarars' children by the appearance of their
newly-apostate fathers (ca. 449):
But on this occasions [i.e., the return from Iran of Vardan Mamikonean and the Armenian naxarars who had converted to Zoroastrianism to extricate themselves from the shah] one could hear the sounds of weeping and moaning, cries of lament and shrieking. Anxious children fled terrified from their fathers' arms, frightened that a transformation had occurred, not considering [their fathers'] appearance to be the same as before. They quickly looked at their mothers' faces which were constantly grieving and streaming with tears. As a result, the children also began to cry, and no one-neither dayeak nor instructor-was able to quiet them (36).
Here P'arpets'I uses the term dayeak
in the sense of nurse, governess, or tutor. In a second reference,
the usage is less clear; the dayeaks may have been nurses
or else the guardian/protectors who raised noble children at some
distance from their actual homes. In the following passage, P'arpets'I
describes the activities of the pro-Iranian naxarar Vasak
Siwnik' at the time of his break with the rebel Vardan Mamikonean
and his partisans, on the eve of the Battle of Awarayr (450/51):
...Suddenly an emissary reached the venerable general of Armenia, Vardan, and the entire brigade with him. He gave them gloomy and wicked news: "The impious Vasak has betrayed the covenant of God and duplicitously broken the oath on the Gospel. He has rebelled from the alliance of Truth. The Armenian nobles who are with him have also rebelled and, turning their faces from the path of justice, they have erred after Satan. They sent an emissary to Iran and made vows to them in letters. They took the fortified strongholds of Armenia, placed their fortress-commanders in them and told them to keep watch. [Vasak] had the children of the Mamikonean tohm, of the Kamsarakans, and of other tanuters gathered from each of their dayeaks, and taken to secure fortresses in the principality of Siwnik' which he ordered carefully held. Furthermore, the treacherous Vasak had the boys sent to the Iranian king" (37).
Concern for the safety of these hostage children was uppermost in the minds of the Vardanians, although it did not stop the war (38). But the fate of the noble children became even more important after the defeat of the Mamikonean alliance in the Battle of Awarayr, since with the deaths of many of their fathers, these boys became the potential heirs to their Houses' Armenian prerogatives. Of course, the rebels' children were not the only captives taken by the Iranians. In addition some forty prominet princes, as well as the Armenian kat'oghikos Yovsep', bishops, and priests were sent to trial before the Iranan shah Yazkert II (439-57):
...The king, angered, commanded that the following day a great atean should be held in his presence, and that everyone, Aryan and non-Aryan and whoever held the king's honor should come in dress, while all the captives should be led into his presence. But he ordered the impious [Iranian official] Mihrnerseh to take the boys and youths of the Mamikonean tohm, the Kamsarakans, and other tohms, and to give them to whomever he pleased (39).
The captive naxarars and their
children were sent into exile in eastern Iran where the naxarars
were forced to perform military service fighting Iran's enemies
for some years before their ultimate release (40).
But the Mamikonean children remained
at the shah's court. Their custody was sought and obtained by
the lord Ashusha, whose wife's sister was the boy's mother:
In the seventeenth year of Yazkert [A.D. 456], the Iberianb [Georgian] prince Ashusha-after spending an incalculable amount on each person and especially on the impious hazarapet Mihrnerseh-beseeched the court nobility and, after great effort convinced them to say to kingYazkert that he [Ashusha] should be favorered with the sons of the venerable champion Hmayeak of the Mamikonean tohm, whom the treacherous prince of Siwnik' had taken from their dayeaks-as the sons of people condemned to death-and had taken to court to be killed. They were extremely young. Humane God, through the intercession of the holy blood of his fathers, persuaded the king to bestow upon Ashusha his great request, which was more unbelievable than all others, since [Ashusha] was a very dear and deserving man (41).
The children were raised by their mother,
Dzuik Artsruni-Mamikonean, in the home of the bdeashx of
Georgia, Ashusha:
The lads who were nourished and schooled there became proficient in everything, and renowned. While still in their childhood they seemed capable and marvelous. The first was named Vahan, the second, Vasak, and the third, Artashes. But they had yet another younger brother, named Vard, who was still a small boy, and was staying with his dayeaks in Tayk' (42).
Also raised with the Mamikonean children
was the historian Ghazar P'arpets'i himself, who was Vahan's lifelong
friend and supporter (43). The contents of Book III of Ghazar's
History describes the exploits of the adult
Vahan Mamikonean, first as a victorious guerrilla warior against
Iran (481-84), and then as Iran's designated governor (marzpan)
of Armenia (485-ca. 506). In the remainder of P'arpets'i's references,
dayeaks are mentioned incidentally, though always appearing
as fervently loyal to their former wards. For example, among those
urging Vahan Mamikonean to go to rescue a doomed brigade in Iberia
were the warriors' "dear ones, relatives, dayeaks,
and servants" (44).
Another reference mentions "Armenia's
general, Vahan Mamikonean, and the naxarars of Armenia
who were with him, together with each one's dayeaks and
beloved servants" (45). The "foster-children" are
shown aiding their dayeaks in battle in other references
(46); they are among a small loyal inner circle grouped around Vahan
Mamikonean and the brothers Nerseh and Hrahat Kamsarakan (47).
Finally, in 485 Iranian policy toward
Armenia changed, and the successful rebel Vahan was to be rewarded
by the Iranian shah Valash (Vologaesus, 484-88). After receiving
back his family's hereditary office of sparapet and the
Mamikonean lordship, Vahan considered the affairs of his relatives
and dayeaks:
King Vagharsh inquired: "Now tell us in plain words what you need, so that we will know". The sparapet of Armenia, lord Vahan Mamikonean said: "Were it possible for you to grant [me] the Kamsarakan terut'iwn [lordship] [I would be] fully favored by you, and would see the death in all of my limbs turn to life".
King Vagharsh replied to Vahan, the sparapet of Armenia, and lord of the Mamikoneans, saying: "So that you will not be very saddened now, and also because you sought that present from us first and foremost, let the Kamsarakan terut'iwn be given to you. But regarding the Artsrunid terut'iwn wait awhile until people from [that] tohm know [about this matter]. Perform some service for us worthily and some merit to benefit the Aryan world, and then we will look to what is fitting" (48).
The sources examined thus far demonstrate
beyond doubt that dayeakut'iwn was an important feature
of naxarar life across the Armenian highlands during the
fourth and fifth centuries. However, the trail of dayeakut'iwn
becomes more difficult to follow in subsequent centuries. To some
extent this is conditioned by the sources. For example, no Armenian
language history of sixth century Armenia has survived; thus for
a century when naxararism may have reached its apex there
is no information about childrearing customs practised by the
lords. The seventh century Sebeos, the eighth century Ghewond,
and the ninth century John Kat'oghikos do not utilize the term
dayeak in reference to their own times. The same may be
said for Armenian historians of the eleventh to fifteenth centuries.
This does not mean that dayeakut'iwn was not practised
in Armenia in the sixth to fifteenth centuries, since the term
dayeak does in fact appear in a few Armenian sources (49).
Nonetheless, these few scattered references in no way compare
to the relatively numerous references found for the period of
the fourth and fifth centuries.
Return to Selected Writings Menu