Sparapet Part 9 The core of the Armenian resistance consisted of the pro-Mamikonean noble families listed ahove, many of whom--as both Vardan and Vahan observed--were related to each other (200). In addition to the noble participants, Ghazar notes the very active presence of infantrymen (ramiks) in the Armenian army (201). From the fact that a Greek named Gherpargos died fighting on Vahan's side, it seems that the army may have included Byzantine volunteers or mercenaries (202). The north Caucasian Huns too were an element that the sparapets considered including in the army. Vardan, after wresting from the Iranians control of the Iron Gates at Derbend, sent a royal Albanian named Vahan to various Hun generals and a military alliance was made (203). Vriw accused Vahan of planning to hire Hun or Byzantine mercenaries (204). Vaxt'ang promised Hun auxiliaries to Vahan (205) and he himself expected Hun support for his own rehellion (206). Some three hundred Huns did in fact arrive in Armenia to help Vahan, but soon were recalled by Vaxt'ang (207).

The importance which Iran attached to both the Vardananc' and Vahaneanc' rebellions is seen clearly from the ranks of Iranian officers sent against the sparapets. Vardan was pursued by the famous hazarapet Mihr Nerseh himself (208). Likewise the Iranian Vehshapuh, who had been chamberlain (senekapan) and chancellor (atenadpir), participated in the campaign against Vardan (209), as did of course Armenia's marzpan Vasak Siwnik' who had previously been marzpan of Iberia (210). Vahan was opposed by the marzpan of Atrpatakan (211), the Iranian marzpan Atrvshnasp (2l2), the marzpan of Armenia Shapuh Mihran (213) and the generals Zarmihr (214) and Nixor Vshnaspdat (2l5). One detachment of Iranians planning to attack Vahan from the districts of Her and Zarewand, included Suren Pahlaw, Atrvshnasp (overseer of the bodyguards), Vin-i Xorean, Itapean Atrvshnasp, and the Siwnik' Prince Gdihon. Ghazar writes: "Although there was one of greater authority [ishxanut'iwn) among them, nonetheless, the commandant and head of the troops was the overseer of the bodyguards (216)".

This last comment is particularly interesting since a very similar remark was made before Yazdgard II by sparapet Vardan himself. The capable Vardan admitted that some of the lords of Armenia, Iberia, and Alhania surpassed him in authority and yet he, not they, was the sparapet (217). Thirty years later Valash's nobility made Vardan's nephew sparapet "according to the law of his ancestors (218)". Tradition here, it seems, is invoked by Ghazar for reasons already mentioned. During the fifth century, the Mamikoneans were sparapets not so much because of tradition, but because of their own organizational and military genius--to say nothing of their ambition. In a century of concerted Iranian efforts to assimilate Armenia forcibly or through subtle means, Armenian Arsacid tradition had little importance to Sasanian Iran. After unsuccessfully trying to destroy the Mamikonean family by killing senior members in war and trying to splinter the family inheritance, Iran finally was forced to recognize the reality it had helped to create in Armenia and was obliged to adopt for the moment a more conciliatory policy toward the Mamikonean family and Armenia in general.



Conclusions


The sources examined in this study permit the construction of a list of Armenian sparapets (see below). The earliest known commander of the Armenian army was Artawazd Mamikonean, sparapet during the reign of King Trdat III (303-330). The last Mamikonean sparapet within the chronological limits of this study was Vahan, who was marzpan of Armenia in addition to being sparapet.

1. Authentic fifth century sources aIl indicate that the sparapetut'iwn as an office held by the Mamikonean family. However, these sources are not explicit on the nature of the transmission of the office. Although there was no requirement for direct patrilineal inheritance in a tun, ordinarily the sparapetut'iwn passed from father to son. Thus Artawazd was the father of sparapet Vach' e, who was the father of Artawazd. But it is not known if Arshak's sparapet Vasak was Artawazd's son. Pap's sparapet Mushegh was the son of Vasak, but it is not known in what relationship Manuel Marnikonean stood to Mushegh. The relationship between Manuel's son Artashir and sparapet Hamazasp Mamikonean (St. Sahak's son-in-law) is not clear. Sparapet Vahan was the nephew, not son, of Vardan.

Apparently the sparapetut'iwn belonged to the head or tanuter of the family, although as a consequence of Arshak's restoration of the Mamikoneans, Vasak was given the sparapetut'iwn while Vardan was "appointed" tanuter (PB. IV.2). The sources record only one instance during the reign of the "false king" Varazdat--when the sparapetut'iwn was held by a non-Mamikonean. The office soon was seized by Manuel, however, who killed sparapet Bat Saharuni and expelled Varazdat.

The sources frequently dwell on the loyalty of the Mamikonean sparapets to their bnik ters, the kings of Armenia, during the period of the Arsacid dynasty. According to P'awstos Buzand, the Mamikoneans are the only legitimate defenders of Armenia's kings from internal and external enemies. Their loyalty to king and country achieves a supernatural quality as do the sparapets themselves. However, following the murder of sparapet Mushegh by King Varazdat, an act subtly compared by P'awstos to the betrayal of Christ, the situation changes. At this time, though, the Arsacids become unworthy of the Armenian throne. Manuel was obliged to seize the sparapetut'iwn and expel the king. P'awstos follows these developments by advancing the theory of Mamikonean equality with the Arsacids. Apparently, throughout the fifth century following the deposition of the Arsacids, the equation of the Mamikoneans with royalty formed a part of the propaganda of the Mamikonean family. For Ghazar P'arpec'i, the Mamikoneans epitomize resistance to Zoroastrianizing enemies, foreign and domestic, and thus are not only outstanding military leaders, but zealous defenders of the Church. In the absence of Arsacid royalty, P'arpec'i equates the Mamikoneans with royalty and, like P'awstos, makes the sparapets the equals of kings anywhere and occasionally supernatural beings.

3. The sources present no information on the traditional prerogatives of the Armenian sparapet. To a large degree this is the result of the nature of the sources themselves, which tend to be epic and eulogistic and the creations of biased clerics directly patronized by the Mamikonean family. For this reason it is impossible to draw any conclusions about the similarities or dissimilarities between the Armenian sparapet and the Iranian Eran-Spahbad.

Footnotes 200-220



Sparapet List

Return to Selected Writings Menu

Return to Main Menu