65 Ghazar P'arpec'i, op.cit.,
I.15.
66 P'awstos Buzand, S.T. Malxasyanc'
trans. (Erevan, 1968), pp. 18-19. On the dprut'iwnk', ibid.,
pp. 6-7.
67 There are references in the text
to a P'awstos of Greek nationality (III,end), a bishop P'awstos
who ordained the future Catholicos Nerses the Great deacon (IV.3),
a P'awstos who was one of a twelve-memher council to assist Nerses
as Catholicos (VI.5), and a P'awstos who buried Nerses (V.24).
If these are all the same figure and the author then he would
have been living in the 50s and 60s of the fourth century during
the time of Nerses Catholicos. Now, because of P'awstos' appellation
Buzand(eay) and the fact that he is said to be of Greek nationality,
some scholars have argued that P'awstos was a late fourth century
Greek bishop who wrote in Greek (his History being translated
into Armenian in the fifth cemtury); or perhaps he was an Armenian
from Byzantine-controlled Western Armenian (Buzanda); a fifth
century cleric educated in the Byzantine empire; or simply P'awstos
from an Armenian town called Buzanda (Malxasyanc' pp. 25-29).
The question of P'awstos identity is by no means a new one. This
question was raised already in the late fifth century hy Ghazar
P'arpec'i who refused to believe that any Bishop P'awstos could
have included certain vulgar and anti-clerical passages that he
laments discovering in P'awstos' History. The offended
Ghazar thinks that the bishop's History was later corrupted
by an uncultured person who assumed the distinguished name of
P'awstos (after the bishop P'awstos found in the text) to increase
the prestige of his compilation of stories (Ghazar P'arpec'i,
op.cit., I. 3-4). Who P'awstos was and what should be understood
by Buzandeay are still unsolved problems. See also note 220.
68 Malxasyanc', pp. 29-30.
69 Professor N. Garsoian in her article
on fourth century Armenia "Politique ou orthodoxie? L'Armenie
au quatrieme siecle" Revue des Etudes armeniennes,
n.s. IV ( 1967) pp. 297-320), has provided an explanation for
P'awstos' unfavorable statements ahout certain Armenian kings,
starements which are directly contradicted in contemporary Byzantine
sources. Because of the fused nature of religious and political
allegiance in this period, the Armenian kings politically allied
with Byzantium were required to follow "every twist and turn
of the Imperial Arianizing policies," a situation which probably
prompted the murders of the Armenian Athanasian Catholicoi Yusik
and Daniel (c. 348) and Nerses (c. 373) by Arianizing mon- archs.
By placing side by side two chronological tables showing the political
and religious developments in the Byzantine Empire and in Armenia,
professor Garsoian very convincingly shows the correlation between
Imperial religious policies and the religio-political events taking
place in Armenia. P'awstos, who is orthodox (Athanasian), has
nothing but hatred for Armenia's Arianizing kings and he accuses
them of spiritual and moral bankruptcy. What is important for
our purposes is that P'awstos' bias in the case of the kings is
systematic. He has given us a sort of chronology for the fourth
century which, though lacking absolute figures, very neatly dovetails
with more easily datable events in Byzantine History.
P'awstos Buzand s information on the Mamikonean sparapets
of fourth century Armenia is also systematically biased and likewise
is contradicted by the reliable Byzantine writer Ammianus Marcellinus
(b. ca. 330) who not only lived in the very times he described
but even travelled to the East in 363 with Emperor Julian. On
Ammianus see note 220 below.
70 Under naxarar law operating
in the fourth and fifth centuries, a clan's holdings could be
appropriated by the crown only if every male member of the clan
in question was killed. If but one male baby was preserved, when
the child reached maturity he could reclaim his family's lands--and
the king was obliged to recognize the validity of the claim. The
Mamikoneans appear as defenders of the naxarar rights in
their capacity as preservers and nourishers of innocent and helpless
children from clans which kings Xosrov II, Tiran, and Arshak tried
to exterminate. Thus P Vach'e raised the son of rebel bdeshx
Bakur of Aghjnik' (PB III.9); Vasak and Artawazd raised Rshtuni
and Arcruni children whom they had saved--withdrawing from court
and even returning to Tiran his son Arshak whom they had been
raising--in order to restore two naxarar clans (PB III.
18); finally, by protecting and raising the little Kamsarakan
prince Spandarad, Vasak Mamikonean prevented king Arshak from
appropriating for long the Kamsarakan holdings in Sirak and Arsharunik'
(PB IV.l9).
71 P'awstos Buzand (PB) History
of Armenia [P'awstosi Buzandac'woy Patmut'iwn Hayoc'],
K. Patkanean, ed. (Venice, 1889), III.11.
72 PB, V.l.
73 Ibid., V.44.
74 PB, III.8.
75 PB, III.18.
76 PB, III.20.
77 PB III. 5-6.
78 lbid.
79 PB, III.8.
80 PB, V.15-16.
81 PB, IV.32.
82 PB, IV.55.
83 PB, V.37.
84 PB, V.4. Each of the two occasions
when Mamikoneans do kill "royal men" may be justified
on the grounds that the executors were acting under the orders
of the king. Thus (1) sparapet Vach'e brought to Xosrov
the bleeding head of the king's Arsacid relative Sanesan. But
Sanesan had rebelled against Armenia and, perhaps a greater sin
to P'awstos, had murdered the 12-year-old Grigoris II, son of
the Armenian Catholicos Vrt'anes and grandson of St. Gregory (PB
III..6); (2) On king Arshak's express instruction Vardan Mamikonean,
older brother of the sparapet Vasak, killed Arshak s nephew
Gnel, allegedly for coveting the crown (PB IV.15).
85 PB, IV.24.
86 Procopius, History of
the Wars, H. Dewing, tr. (London, 1912), I.v.40.
87 Ibid., I.v.28; PB, IV.54.
88 Thus, while Vasak Mamikonean's name
appears in P'awstos' list of notables accompanying bishop P'aren
to Caesarea for ordination as Catholicos (PB III. 17), the Mamikonean
name is noticeably absent from the group of naxarars taking
P'aren's successor Sahak Aghbianos to the same city and returning
with him to king Tiran (339-350). (Or else the Mamikoneans were
present but PB suppressed their name. The list of the group accompanying
Sahak is more vague than most (III.17). It is no wonder that
in his saga P'awstos minimizes the Mamikonean association with
Tiran: for the Arianizing Tiran had murdered P'aren's two predecessors,
the Catholicos Yusik and Daniel (c. 348), and it was during Tiran's
reign that the Mamikoneans withdrew from court. It is one thing
to accompany a future Catholicos to Caesarea for ordination and
quite another to deliver up to an Arianizing king his own hand-picked
candidate from a rival line. The delegation traveling with P'aren
to Caesarea was the last to accompany a cleric who, though perhaps
not a Gregorid and one who "Reprimanded no one" (i.e.,
Tiran), still appears to have been somewhat acceptable to the
author (PB III.l6; Adontz, pp. 274-275). Following P'aren's death
soon afterward, subsequent delegations sent to accompany crown-selected
Albianid Catholicoi included the arch-fiend Hayr mardpet.
Vasak, accompanying P'aren, had been part of the last group of
"loyalists", pro-Gregorid representatives of the most
noble families including Mehendak Rshtuni, Andok Siwnik', and
Arshawir Kamsarakan (PB III.l6). Dramatically and with swords
drawn, Vasak and Artawazd Mamikonean withdrew from court to their
patrimonial holdings in Tayk', protecting the little sons of the
Rshtuni and Arcruni clans from Tiran's attempt to exterminate
them (PB III.18). Thus in defense of the orthodox religious values
cherished by P'awstos, the Mamikoneans withdrew from court, just
as the Athanasian Gregorid Catholicos Nerses did later (c. 359)
during king Arshak's Arianizing period (Garsoian, "Politique
ou orthodoxie?" p. 309; PB IV.15). The Mamikoneans reappear
at court only after Arshak has sought them out, in a period of
orthodox reaction in Byzantium (c. 363) PB IV.2. The orthodox
Nerses is ordained Catholicos and again a Mamikonean name appears
among the naxarars accompanying Nerses on a journey to
Byzantium. The Mamikoneans return to court in IV.2. In IV.3,
an assembly including military leaders but not the sparapet
specifically, has Nerses ordained deacon against his will. The
Mamikonean name is not mentioned among the naxarars accompanying
Nerses to Caesarea for ordination, although Mamikonean relatives
(Kamsarakan and Siwnik') are present (IV.4). Perhaps chapter 3
should precede 2, or perhaps P'awstos did not want to associate
the Mamikoneans with a forced ordination. And yet it is "Bishop
P'awstos" himself who performs the ordination! )
The absence or presence of St. Nerses
at Arshak's court likewise may be the key to another difficulty.
During the reign of Arshak (350-364) acting under royal orders,
Vardan Mamikonean (sparapet Vasak's brother) killed the
innocent Arsacid cadet Gnel, Arshak's nephew (PB IV.15); Vasak
killed Vardan (PB IV.l8); Vahan, another brother, apostasized,
destroyed churches, and even murdered his Christian relative Hamazaspuhi
(PB IV.50). In each disgraceful instance that the Mamikoneans
appear in an unfavorable light, Nerses was not at court or (as
in the case of Vasak's execution by Shapuhr) Nerses' advice to
the naxarars to unite around Arshak, Vasak, and Andok Siwnik'
was rejected (PB IV.51). With Nerses back at court under Pap,
the new sparapet Mushegh tried to undo some of the damage:
Zoroastrian fire-temples were destroyed and many pro-Persian naxarars
were killed (PB V.l).
According to P'awstos, Pap had Nerses
murdered (c. 373) and once more appointed Aghbianids to the Catholicosate
(PB V.24). However the author seems to foreshadow Pap's swing
to Arianizing policy earlier in. his narrative, at V.4. There,
before a battle Mushegh accepted Nerses' prayers over his standards,
but he refused the horse and spear of his lord Pap. Pap had questioned
Mushegh's loyalty, and with good reason, since for P'awstos the
Mamikoneans cannot be loyal to Arianizing kings without disastrous
consequences. A final insult is hurled at the memory of Pap who
was murdered by the Byzantines, for when Mushegh, Hayr, and the
other princes met and decided not to avenge their king through
the blood feud, they broke an ancient and honored convention of
this society, feeling perhaps that Pap was not worth avenging
(PB V.29).
89 PB, IV.ll.
90 PB, IV.23.
91 PB, IV.59.
92 PB, V.2.
93 PB, III. 11.
94 PB, V.35.
95 PB, V.36.
96 PB, V.37.
97 PB, IV.54.
98 PB, IV.50.
99 PB, V.2.
100 PB, V.37.
101 PB, V.42.
102 PB, V.44.
103 PB, V.38.