P'arpec'i expresses Mamikonean equality
with the very highest Iranian nobility in a second effective way.
He frequently portrays the Iranian nobility as especially solicitous
of the Mamikoneans whom they often praise. Thus the death of Vardan
was lamented not only by the Zoroastrian hazarapet Mihr
Nerseh (176), but by King Yazdgard II himself (177). Vahan supposedly
was favored even as a child by the Iranian grandees who praised
him before King Peroz (178). Vahan was toasted by Valash's peace-negotiator
Nixor, who also praised Vahan's bravery (179). When Vahan travelled
to Valashs' court, the king himself was solicitous about his guest's
comfort and postponed their meeting until Vahan was rested (180).
Vahan's speech at court was praised by the Iranian nobility and
his eloquence in speaking at court (atenaxosut`iwn) was
said to be divinely granted (181). Finally, after delivering
a speech in which Vahan fearlessly denounced the Iranians and
Valash agreed that Vahan's revolt had been justified (182), the
latter was loaded with honors and sent home triumphantly. Nor
are Vardan and Vahan the only Mamikoneans whom imperial Iran took
note of. Young Grigor Mamikonean's brilliance at the head of an
Armenian detachment
fighting the rebel Zareh was watched
closely by Valash himself (183). The Mamikoneans are equated with
the highest nohility and are the favorites if not the equals of
the Iranian kings. Ghazar has marzpan Andekan make the
following remarks to Valash about Vahan:
Who has his grace and intelligence besides you (who are god-like and ahove human nature)? Boldly I say that there is no one else. There is scarcely a one to compare with him. (184)
This quotation is interesting because
therein Vahan is equated with the king of Iran. It is also noteworthy
that the Iranian mcmarch is said to be god-like and above human
nature. For Vahan too is represented as a sort of superhuman.
Thus, despite his unbearable exhaustion, Vahan arranged his troops
at Steo village and tried to raise the men's morale (185). After
his soldiers deserted, Vahan made the sign of the Cross and entered
battle like a mythological warrior spirit, the k'aj (186).
The Iranian soldiers were afraid to look at his face (187).
The marzpan Shapuh Mihran noted that he had never heard
of a commander pitting ten men against three thousand troops as
Vahan did (188). As Vahan is not human; like a k'aj of
former times (189), he is fighting his enemy "like an eagle
swooping down on a flock of partridge (190)". He can ford
a swollen river safely after making the sign of the Cross (191).
His work is ahove human deeds, "let the listener think what
he will" (192).
Ghazar P'arpec'i's History of Armenia
contains references to five sparapets: Theodosius II's
sparapet in Antioch named Anatol; Peroz' sparapet
Vahram; Hamazasp Mamikonean; his famous son Vardan; and Vahan,
the latter's nephew. P'arpec'i has little to say ahout Anatol
beyond the information that this sparapet was one of the
parties appealed to for aid by the Vardaneanc' and that partly
due to Anatol's meddling, Theodosius decided against helping the
rehels in 450-451. Information ahout the Iranian ,sparapet
is also limited, although it is fuller than what P'arpec'i presents
on the Byzantine officer designated by the same title. Peroz'
sparapet Vahram is mentioned twice. According to Ghazar,
Vahram along with other Iranian grandees unsuccessfully attempted
to dissuade Peroz from warring on the Hepthalites. Peroz,
however, refused to heed his advice
(193). Ghazar's second reference to the Iranian sparapet
provides no proper name hut instead deals with the prerogatives
of any Iranian sparapet. Prior to being brought back into
the service of the Iranian crown, the rebel Vahan rode into the
camp of King Valash's peace-negotiator Nixor with his trumpets
sounding. Nixor, alarmed, sent a message to Vahan, saying that
he was not observing Aryan custom and that he should. Nixor says
that only the Aryan sparapet has the right to such a prestigious
entry. Vahan haughtily replied that he is already familiar with
Iranian customs and will obey such customs only when he is the
vassal of the Iranian king (194). Until that time Vahan obviously
considered himself the equal of the Iranian sparapet, one
of whose prerogatives the Armenian sparapet temporarily
appropriated.
P'arpec`i's specific information on
the Armenian sparapetut'iwn concerns not traditional rights,
but the new rights which sparapet Vahan asserted. During
the Vahaneanc' uprising, a separate Mamikonean administration
was set up in Armenia under Vahan's ultimate direction. Thus at
the outset of his revolt, having "received his sparapetut'iwn
first from God and second from the will of the Armenian people",
Vahan appointed as marzpan Sahak Bagratuni, who is presented
as the Mamikonid counterpart to Yozmandean Atrvshnasp, the Iranian-appointed
marzpan of Armenia (195). Sparapet Vahan also
directed his administration by naming pro-Mamikoneans as lords
of certain districts held during the struggles by pro-Iranian
apostate naxarars. Most likely this circumstance explains
the statement that on the eve of the Vahaneanc', Vahan's comrade-in-arms
Babgen Siwnik' was appointed prince of the Siwnik' terut'iwn
despite the fact that Gdihon Siwnik was still alive and apparently
ruling Siwnik' as lord, like Vasak and Varazvaghan before him,
with the complete support of Iran (196).
The highly sensitive and unstable situation
in which many naxarar houses found themselves during the
fifth century made activities of the generalissimo, such as arranging
the wings of his army or en- couraging the soldiers, very difficult.
Not only was desertion frequent as seen already, but the deliberate
dissemination of misinformation by thc enemy made things more
complicated yet. Thus Vargos Gnt'uni and Vasak Saharuni reported
to Catholicos Yovhan, marzpan Sahak, and sparapet
Vahan that Vasak Mamikonean and the flower of the country's military
had heen defeated, when in fact they had been the victors (197).
Later, false messages were sent to Vahan from Iberia claiming
that after a disastrous hattle there many knights were alive and
safe, when the opposite was true. This message was sent with the
ex- pectation that Vahan immediately would dispatch half his army
to rescue the survivors, thereby reducing his ability to resist
the Iranians in Armenia (198). Under such conditions of disunity
among the naxarars, because of the terrain and the overwhelming
numerical superiority of the enemy, resistance usually took the
form of guerilla warfare (199).
Return to Selected Writings Menu