Controversy also exists over the author's
identity, and over where, in what language, and when this history
was written (67). The question of the dating of this work is
of direct concern. Malxasyanc' compiled certain facts which seem
to place the author (P'awstos) in the fifth century. First, P'awstos
is familiar with the name of only one Byzantine emperor (Valens)
for almost the entire span of his History i.e.,
319-384, when in fact during this period emperors Constantine,
Constantius, Julian, lovian, Valens, Gratian, amd Theodosius the
Great ruled. Since Armenia was in frequent contact with Byzantium
during that time, Malxasyanc ' argues, a fourth century writer
naturally would know the emperors' names. P'awstos, living in
the fifth century, had only a vague recollection of fourth century
emperors and so styled them all Valens. Again, P'awstos contends
that the Armenian king Arshak (350-367) ruled during the
time of the Iranian king Nerseh (293-302) and the Byzantine
emperor Valens (364-378), when in fact these last two autocrats
were not even contemporaries. Another important proof of the History's
fifth century date is its source material, which includes
the Armenian translation of the Bible (430's) and Koriwn's biography
of Mashtoc'. Finally, in Catholicos Nerses the Great's curse of
the Armenian Arsacids which appears in IV. 15, Nerses seems to
prophesy the end of the Arsacid kingdom (68).
P'awstos lacks chronology in the strict
sense: he does not mention in which king's regnal year an event
occurred or how long each king reigned. However, he does know
the correct sequence of Armenian kings from Xosrov II Kotak (330-339)
to Varazdat (374-378) and mentions each one by name. Despite
numerous problems associated with the text, P'awstos' information
still has the greatest value; although he lacks numerical chronology,
the thematic unity on occasion substitutes, nonetheless, for an
absolute chronology (69).
As a historian of the Mamikoneam naxarar
house, P'awstos' desire is to portray the Mamikoneans as the defenders
par excellence of Armenia. To P'awstos, the Mamikoneans
are not merely the only legitimate military defenders of the country,
but also the loyal defenders of the Arsacid family, defenders
of the Church, and defenders of naxarar rights (70). The
contradiction which arises from the fact that P'awstos simultaneously
has made the Mamikoneans defenders of the kings and of the naxarars--two
usually inimical groups--appears to have been resolved by the
author by a second assumption that the Mamikoneans are in fact
the equals of the Arsacids.
P'awstos' first assumption--that the
Mamikoneans are the only legitimate military defenders of Armenia--is
developed in several ways. The family's legal right to the sparapetut'iwn
is stressed throughout. Thus the small child Artawazd succeeded
his father Vach'e as sparapet even though he clearly
was too young to fulfill the obligations of the office. Two generals,
Andok Siwnik' and Arsawir Kamsarakan, looked after the military
affairs of the country during Artawazd's minority, and P'awstos
notes that these naxarars were relatives of the
Mamikoneans through marriage, as if to explain how they came to
be entrusted with such responsibility (71). Mushegh became sparapet
immediately upon the execution of his father Vasak by the Iranian
king (72); Artasir inherited the sparapetut'iwn from his
aiIing father Manuel (73) and this automatic succession is presented
as normal procedure.
When the Armenian army is under its
legal Mamikonean sparapets, it is invincible. Only when
the army is led by non-Mamikoneans can foreigners overrun
Armenia. This happened when King Xosrov (330-339) appointed
Databa Bznuni to ward off an Iranian invasion. Databa deserted
to the enemy and almost destroyed the Armenian army (74). When
the Mamikoneans angrily withdrew from court affairs under Xosrov's
successor, Tiran (339-350), (75) the country was invaded
once more by the Iranians and the king himself was blinded and
taken captive. The king and the country were vulnerable since
there was no one (Mamikonean) to protect them (76).
Not only do the Mamikoneans protect
the country from external enemies such as Iranians or Mask'ut
nomads (77), but as the loyal defenders of their land's bnik
ters, the Mamikoneans fight against domestic enemies. Vach'e,
sparapet of Xosrov, was in charge of exterminating the
rebellious Manawazean and Orduni clans (78) and he later exterminated
the Bznunis as well (79). During the reign of Pap (368-374),
sparapet Mushegh Mamikonean massacred the clans of the
bdesxsh of Aghjnik' and Gugark' who had rebelled against
the authority of the king, and in Iberia he ordered the crucifixion
of the P'arawazean clan (80). Sparapet Vasak even killed
his own Iranian cousin, Dehkan, in defense of Armenia and King
Arshak (350-368) (81).
The Mamikoneans' loyalty to the crown
is expressed too in the family's role as protectors of the royal
line: Vasak's son Mushegh travelled to the Byzantine empire to
install Pap, Arshak's legitimate heir, who was residing on Byzantine
territory, as King of Armenia (82). Manuel Mamikonean was so
devoted to the royal family (or so P'awstos implies) that, like
a wise father, he raised the two sons of Pap's son Varazdat (374-378)--
a king he had expelled from the country after a dramatic battle
(83). In this clash Manuel prevented his own sons from killing
the fleeing Varazdat, just as earlier Mushegh, accused of disloyalty
before Pap, had explained his refusal to kill the Albanian king
Urnayr:
I killed all of my peers [enkerk'] while those wearing crowns were not my peers, but yours. Come, just as I killed my peers do you kill yours. For I have not, do not, nor shall I put forth my hand against a royal man who wears a crown. If you wish to kill me, do that but whenever a royal man falls into my clutches as has happened many times, I will not kill him. I will not kill the wearer of a crown even if I am killed (84)
The loyalty of the Mamikoneans is so
profound that it acquires a supernatural quality. After the Iranian
army had scattered the bones of the Armenian Arsacid kings, desecrating
the graves in the royal mausoleum at Ani of Daranalik', sparapet
Vasak Mamikonean retrieved these bones and buried them, caring
for the memory of deceased kings and providing for the rest of
their souls (85). Supernatural loyalty is also apparent in P'awstos'
narration of the fate of the executed Vasak's straw-filled
corpse. The sixth century Byzantine author Procopius who claims
to have used a "History of Armenia" says
that Shapuhr [Pacurius] flayed Vasak [Bassicius] and, making a
bag of his skin, filled it with chaff and suspended it from a
lofty tree (86). P'awstos preserves the same fate for Vasak but
claims that Vasak's body was sent to Anhush fortress where King
Arshak was imprisoned, as if to say that even in death this sparapet,
and by implication all the Mamikonean sparapets, are loyal
and near to their bnik ters--the Arsacid kings of Armenia
(87).
As defenders of the Church, the Mamikoneans
are depicted as loyal Athanasian Christians and supporters of
Armenia's legitimate Gregorian line of Catholicoi (88). In addition
to defending the Church zealously, the Mamikoneans are the holy
warriors of Armenia. During an Athanasian period in Arshak's confusing
reign, for example, sparapet Vasak was ordered to
ravage Byzantine lands for six years to avenge the Byzantine arrest
of Nerses (89). Later this same Vasak defeated hosts of Iranian
soldiers and an army of Armenian apostates (90). As a prelude
to the return of Nerses to court, Samuel Mamikonean murdered his
apostate father Vahan and his royal Iranian mother (91). By destroying
Zoroastrian temples and rebuilding churches, Mushegh continued
this process of restoring the work of Nerses and undoing the damage
caused by the pro-franian Vahan (92).
Naturally P'awstos would like his readers
to believe that some of the early sparapets such as Vach'e
were not mere mortals, but the agents of God through whom Armenia
enjoyed many victories (93). However, it is in the personality
of the later Mushegh that P'awstos' fanatical proMamikonean bias
and his religious worldview are fused the best. For Mushegh has
much in common with Christ. He is the savior of his people, condemned
for his compassion. Betrayed at a banquet reminiscent of the Last
Supper, he is attacked and killed by all twelve "apostles,"
six on one side and six on the other (94). P'awstos adds that
the people expected Mushegh's resurrection (95).
The other assumption made by P'awstos--that
the Mamikoneans are the equals of the Arsacids--is expressed by
direct assertion and by the implications of certain details. The
first actual expression of this equality appears in a dubious
passage in V. 4 where King Pap himself sald:
Worthy of death are those who dare to speak ill of Mushegh, a brave and honorable man. For [he is] a man who by family [azg] is as honorable as we, his ancestors as our ancestors His ancestors left the kingship of the Iand of Chenk' and came to our ancestors and they lived and died for us. His father, trustworthy until death, died for my father...
A second claim of equality between the
Mamikoneans and the Arsacids was advanced by Manuel during his
battle with king Varazdat (ca. 378) which resulted in the latter's
expulsion from the country. Manuel denounced Varazdat for appointing
to the sparapetut'iwn a non-Mamikonean, Bat
Saharuni, and added:
You are not an Arsacid, but a bastard. Therefore you do not recognize those who work for the Arsacids. We are not your servants [carayk'] but your peers [enkerk'] and we are above you. For our ancestors were kings of the land of Chenk'. Because of a quarrel among brothers, to prevent great bloodshed we left [that land]. And to find rest we stopped here [in Armenia]. The first Arsacid kings knew who we were and where we came from. But you, since you are not an Arsacid, begone from this country and do not perish at my hands.(96)
The claim of equality with and fitness
for the crown is stressed likewise in the details. The imperial
claim even transends the boundaries of Armenia, since the Mamikoneans
are equal or superior to kings anywhere. For example, Arshak's
ill-fated sparapet Vasak boasted to the Iranian king
that he stood on two mountains (the Iranian and Byzantine kings)
and that he brought either one to the ground by pushing down with
his right or left leg (97). According to P'awstos, Vasak's brother
(the apostate Vahan) was married to the imperial Iranian Ormizduxt
(sister of the Iranian king) (98). A portrait of Pap's sparapet
Mushegh appeared on the drinking goblet of the Iranian king who
even toasted the health of his noble enemy (99).
Manuel Mamikonean, who expelled king
Varazdat, is in fact a king. He raised Varazdat's children,
and together with queen Zarmanduxt made all the important decisions
in the country (100). He sanctioned the return of land to naxarars
Babik, Sam, and Vaghinak Siwnik', and appointed ters and
nahapets "in every district"-- a traditional
prerogative of the monarch (101). Manuel also married his daughter
Vardanduxt to the young Arshak (son of Varazdat) whom he made
king (102). Most significant of all is P'awstos' statement about
the gifts sent by the Iranian king to the crown princes Arshak
and Vagharshak as well as to the sparapet Manuel:
The king gave to sparapet Manuel a royal robe, a sable, a patiw for his head wilh a crest of gold and silver On top of this headdress was [the figure of] an eagle and the crown was fastened with an ashxarawand clasp. On his breast he wore a brooch of honor. [Such things he was given] which by law only kings have: a tent of red leather and on it an eagle's design, great hangings, and sky-blue parasols (103).
Return to Selected Writings Menu