Sasanian Reflections in

Armenian Sources
TIM GREENWOOD
University of St Andrews

e-Sasanika 3
2008

The deep impression of Iran upon all aspects of early mediaeval Armenia has long been recognized.
Although linguists may have taken the lead in tracing this influence, scholars in all disciplines,
particularlyhistoriansandtheologians,haveunearthedmultipleparallelsandconnectionsbetweenthe
twocultures.ThepenetratingstudiesbyGarsoanandRusselloverthepastfourdecadeshaveproved
tobeparticularlyinfluential,totheextentthatnoscholartodaywouldseriouslycontemplatestudying
early mediaeval Armenia without acknowledging its Iranian heritage.1 Indeed such is the degree of
unanimityoverthelevelofIranianinfluenceuponallaspectsofArmeniansocietyandculturethatthe
contention has begun to operate in the opposite direction. Armenian sources have been exploited to
shedlightuponIranian,andspecificallySasanian,history.PourshariatisrecentstudyofSasanianIran
exemplifiesthisapproach,makingextensiveuseofoneArmeniantextinparticular,namelytheHistory
attributedtoSebeos.2Takingthisprocessastagefurther,shealsoconsiderstheoreticalreconstructions
ofmediaevalArmeniansocietyandappliesthemtothewiderSasanianworld.3

N.G.Garsoan,ProlegomenatoastudyoftheIranianaspectsinArsacidArmenia,HandesAmsoryavol.
XC,1976,col.177234;repr.inN.G.Garsoan,ArmeniabetweenByzantiumandtheSasanians,Variorum,
London,1985,no.X;N.G.Garsoan,TheLocusoftheDeathofKings:IranianArmeniaTheInverted
Image,TheArmenianImageinHistoryandLiterature,ed.R.Hovanissian,UCLAStudiesinNearEastern
CultureandSociety3,ChicoCA,1981,pp.2764;repr.inGarsoan,Armenia,no.XI;N.G.Garsoan.,The
twovoicesofArmenianmediaevalhistoriography:TheIranianIndex,StudiaIranicavol.25,1996,pp.7
43;repr.inN.G.Garsoan,ChurchandCultureinEarlyMediaevalArmenia,AshgateVariroum,Aldershot,
1999,no.XI.J.R.Russell,ArmeniaandIran:IIIArmenianReligion,EncyclopaediaIranica,ed.E.
Yarshater,vol.II,1987,pp.438444;J.R.Russell,ArmenianandIranianStudies,HarvardArmenianTexts
andStudies9,CambridgeMA,2004.
2P.Pourshariati,DeclineandFalloftheSasanianEmpire,I.B.Tauris,LondonandNewYork,2008,
especiallychapter2andthefirstthreesectionsofchapter3.
3Pourshariati,DeclineandFall,pp.5356,drawingextensivelyuponC.ToumanoffslongstudyThe
SocialBackgroundofChristianCaucasiawhichwaspublishedinhisStudiesinChristianCaucasian
History,GeorgetownUniversityPress,Georgetown,1963,pp.33144.
1

This is certainly not the occasion on which to embark upon a comprehensive review of the
relationshipbetweenIranandArmeniainthemediaevalperiod,nortooffersomemeticuloushistorical
reconstruction.Thefollowingisintendedtoserveasnomorethananintroductorysurveyofrelevant
Armenian sources for the study ofSasanianIran. Particular attentionwill be paid to three Armenian
historicaltexts.Inaddition,severalotherArmeniansourceswillbehighlightedwhosesignificancefor
Sasanian scholarship has not perhaps been sufficiently appreciated. Finally, material evidence,
specificallytworelevantinscriptions,willbeintroduced.
Beforeembarkingonthisexercise,however,awiderinterpretativeframeworkneedstobesketched
withinwhichtheindividualsourcesmaybeanalyzed.Thiscomprisesfourgeneralpropositions.Firstly
it seems that Iranian influences upon Armenia were multiple and varied, ranging from long
establishedsocialandculturaltiestobriefepisodesofconflictandconfrontation.Itmaythereforebe
more appropriate to think of different levels or layers of Iranian influence operating across Armenia
simultaneously, some deeprooted, others ephemeral. Their combination will have altered over time.
Secondly, it seems very probable that these influences engendered different responses in different
regions of Armenia. To take one example, Siwnik, or Sisagan, is repeatedly presented in Armenian
sourcesasthedomainofperfidiousprinceswhosecommitmenttotheArmeniancausewasinherently
suspect.4YetthedegreetowhichSiwnikperceiveditselftobeArmenianremainsveryopen.Ifthere
wasaseparateSiwnilanguage,asZachariahofMitylenemaintained,5andifthediwanofSiwnikcould
betransferredfromDvintothecityofPaytakaranattherequestofprinceVahanofSiwnik,toputthe
cityintheahrmarofAtrpatakan(MiddlePersianAdurbdagn)sothatthenameofArmenianwouldno

ThetreacheryofVasakprinceofSiwnikisacentralthemeinazarParpetsisdescriptionofthe
Armenianrevoltof450/451CE.azarattributestheimmediatecauseoftherebelliontoadisputebetween
Vasakandhissoninlawandsuccessor,Varazvaan.Strikingly,botharecondemnedinnouncertain
termsbytheauthor.Vasakmaybemalicious(arakhorhurd),impious(anrn)andtreacherous(nengawor)
butVarazvaanismalevolent(arimatsin),impure(pits)andinsane(khelatsnor).SeeazarParpetsi,
PatmutiwnHayots,ed.G.TrMkrteanandS.Malkhasean,Tiflis,1904;repr.DelmarNY,1985,pp.39
86;EnglishtranslationbyR.W.Thomson,TheHistoryofazarParpeci,OccasionalPapersand
Proceedings4,ScholarsPress,AtlantaGA,1991,pp.75132.
5ZachariasofMytilene,Chronicle,ed.byE.W.Brooks,Historiaecclesiastica,CorpusScriptorum
ChristianorumOrientaliumvol.84,ScriptoresSyritome39,Louvain,1953,xii.7,p.214;English
translationbyF.J.HamiltonandE.W.Brooks,TheSyriacchronicleknownasthatofZachariahofMitylene,
Methuen&Co.,London,1899;repr.NewYork,1979,p.328.
4

longer be applied to them,6 there are good grounds for supposing that the very status of Siwnik as
Armenianwasamatterofcontention.ThisilluminateswhyitsengagementwithSasanianIranwasso
often out of step with the rest of Armenia. This introduces a broader issue, specifically the degree of
uniformitysocial,cultural,linguisticwithinArmenia.Althoughitisgenerallyassumedthatallthe
princely houses of Armenia operated in thesame way in terms of inheritance, landholding and that
nexus of mutual rights and responsibilities through which social relations were structured, what if
therewereslightdifferencesbetweenthem,ifwhatcanbedemonstratedwithinonefamilycannotbe
predicatedforallofthem?ThishasimplicationsforwidercomparativestudiesbetweenArmeniaand
Sasanian Iran, not least because the great noble houses in Iran might themselves have possessed a
similarrangeofindividualtraditions,makingithardertodeterminewhatisrepresentativeandwhatis
anomalous and unique. Thirdly the degree to which Iranian influences were themselves conditioned
andmodifiedbyexposuretoothertraditionsandcircumstancesoperatingacrossArmenianeedstobe
established. It is not hard to envisage how the reception of these influences and their adoption was
accompaniedbyalteration.Andfinally,theevolutionarynatureoftherelationshipbetweenIranand
Armeniadeservesgreaterstress.Thereiseveryreasontosupposethattherelationshipdevelopedand
changed very significantly over time. The character of that relationship in the middle of the fifth
century had altered dramatically by the start of the seventh century. The projection of a valiant
Christian nation bravely resisting an impious Sasanian oppressor described so vividly but also so
differentlybyazarandEi7maybethemostfamiliarexpressionoftheirengagement,atleastfrom
an Armenian perspective, but it needs to be set against the remarkable confessional repositioning
which occurred under Xusr II (Armenian Khosrov), with miaphysite clerics, including Armenian
churchmen,nowverymuchpreferredovermembersoftheChurchoftheEast.8Fortunatelysomething

Sebeos,PatmutiwnSebeosi,ed.G.V.Abgaryan,Erevan,1979,pp.67.3268.2;Englishtranslationand
commentarybyR.W.ThomsonandJ.D.HowardJohnston,TheArmenianHistoryattributedtoSebeos,
TranslatedTextsforHistorians31,LiverpoolUniversityPress,Liverpool,1999,p.6.
7Ei,EiivasnVadanayewHayotsPaterazmin,ed.E.TrMinasyan,Erevan,1957;Englishtranslationby
R.W.Thomson,Ei:HistoryofVardanandtheArmenianWar,HarvardArmenianTextsandStudies5,
CambridgeMA,1982.Foranovelassessmentofthiswork,seeS.P.Cowe,EisArmenianWarasa
metaphorforthespirituallife,inFromByzantiumtoIran,ed.JP.MahandR.W.Thomson,Scholars
Press,AtlantaGA,1997,pp.341359.
8 For the positive reception of the Armenian Catholicos Komitas, see T.W. Greenwood, The Armenian
Church in the Seventh Century, in A History of the Armenian Church, ed. K. Bardakjian (Wayne State
6

of the changing character of the relationship can be traced within the body of Armenian materials
discussedbelow.
For scholars of Parthian and Sasanian Iran, the two best known Armenian sources remain the so
called Buzandaran Patmutiwnk, or Epic Histories, and Patmutiwn Hayots, or History of Armenia,
compiledbyMovssKhorenatsi.9BothhavebeenquarriedbyGarsoanandRussellfortheirmultiple
reflections of Iranian, and specifically Parthian, tradition. It is worth noting that both texts were
compiledlongaftertheeventstheydescribe.TheBuzandaranPatmutiwnk,whichrecordsexclusively
fourthcentury Armenian history, was probably composed in the last third of the fifth century;
Garsoanarguespersuasivelyforadateinthe470s.10ThedateofcompositionoftheHistoryofMovss
Khorenatsi remains contentious. Although its coverage extends from Noah to the death of Mesrop
Matotsin440CE,thereisaconsiderablebodyofcredibleevidencewhichcollectivelysuggeststhatit
wascomposedattheveryendoftheseventhcenturyoratthestartoftheeighthcentury.11Oncemore
therefore there is a significant gap between the chronological limits and the putative date of
composition. Whilst this gap does not undermine the centrality of these texts for the study of deep
seatedIranianinfluencewithinArmenia,andthepersistenceofIraniantraditions,itmaydistendtheir
recollectionofcontemporaryconditionsprevailingwithin,andattitudestowards,SasanianIran.Sucha
gap can have a distancing effect, causing later phenomena to be retrojected back into the past and
episodestobemodifiedinthelightofsubsequentdevelopmentsandevents.Therisksofanachronism
andconflationaresubstantial,withperceptionsanddetailswhichmayneverhaveexistedconcurrently
jumbledtogetherinasinglenarrative.
In an attempt to avoid these pitfalls, this survey advocates a different approach, one which is
focuseduponthepotentialhistoricalcontributionofthoseArmeniantextswhichattestcontemporary

UniversityPress)(Forthcoming)andbelow.Forconfessionalrepositioning,seeB.Flusin,SaintAnastasele
perseetlhistoiredelaPalestineaudbutduVIIesicle,2vols.,Centrenationaldelarecherchescientifique,
Paris,1992,II,pp.106118.
9Buzandaran,PatmutiwnHayots,Venice,1933;EnglishtranslationbyN.G.Garsoan,TheEpicHistories
(BuzandaranPatmutiwnk),HarvardArmenianTextsandStudies8,CambridgeMA,1989.Movss
Khorenatsi,PatmutiwnHayots,ed.M.AbeeanandS.Yarutiwnean,Tiflis1913;repr.DelmarNY,1981;
EnglishtranslationbyR.W.Thomson,MosesKhorenatsi:HistoryoftheArmenians,HarvardArmenian
TextsandStudies4,CambridgeMA,1978;repr.andrevisedCaravanBooks,AnnArborMI,2006.
10Garsoan,EpicHistories,pp.611.
11Forabriefsummary,seeThomson,MosesKhorenatsi,pp.ixxviiand5560.

Armenianattitudestowards,andexperienceof,SasanianPersia.Threesuchtextshavebeenidentified.
The first of these, the Patmutiwn Hayots, or History of Armenia, composed by azar Parpetsi, was
writtenaround500CE,andisbestknownforitsaccountoftheArmenianuprisingagainstYazdgerd
(ArmenianYazkert)IIin450/451CE,extendingacrossthefirsttwobooks.Itsfinalthirdbook,however,
is focused largely upon the events of the 480s and concludes with the appointment of Vahan
MamikoneanasmarzpanofArmeniain485CE.12Thishasnotreceivedthesustainedscholarlyattention
that it merits. The Patmutiwn Sebosi, or History attributed to Sebeos, was completed in 655 CE, with
threeupdatingnoticesbeingappendedtotheoriginalconclusionnolaterthan661CE.13Itscoverageof
Sasanian history, as well as Sasanian engagement with Armenia, extends from 572 CE down to the
death of Yazdgerd III.As will be proved below, thistextaffords significant historical purchase upon
the late Sasanian world. Finally book II of the socalled Patmutiwn Auanits, or History of Auank,
variouslyandwronglyattributedtoeitherMovssDaskhurantsiorMovssKaankatuatsi,containsa
plethoraofdetailcommentinguponSasanianIranintheseventhcentury.14Thegeneralconsensusof
opinionamongscholarsisthattherich,detailedhistoricalnarrativeembeddedinBookIIderivesfrom
contemporary or nearcontemporary sources which have not been repeatedly revised or rewritten,
althoughthereremainssignificantdisagreementoverthevehicleinwhichthismaterialwaspreserved.
Somescholarshavearguedforcefullyfortheexistenceofasinglepostulatedsourceandevengoneso
farastogiveitaseparatename;othersremainunconvinced.15
Letusturnbrieflytoeachofthesetexts.BookIIIofazarsHistoryisthelongestsectionofthework
andengageswithnearcontemporaryeventsandconditions.Itiscentereduponthecareerofazars
sponsor, Vahan Mamikonean, and specifically the circumstances in which he rebelled against Prz
(459484 CE) and came to terms with his successor Walx (Armenian Vaar) (484488 CE). The text

azar,pp.107182;Thomson,Historyofazar,pp.158245.
Forarecentstudyofthewholetext,seeT.W.Greenwood,SasanianEchoesandApocalyptic
Expectations:AreevaluationoftheArmenianHistoryattributedtoSebeos,LeMusonvol.115.3/4,2002,
pp.323397.
14MovssKaankatuatsi,PatmutiwnAuanitsakharhi,ed.V.Arakelyan,Erevan,1983,pp.106180;
EnglishtranslationbyC.J.F.Dowsett,TheHistoryoftheCaucasianAlbaniansbyMovssDasxuranci,London
OrientalSeries8,OxfordUniversityPress,London,1961,pp.61116.
15Forahelpfulsummaryofthisdebate,seeJ.D.HowardJohnston,ArmenianhistoriansofHeraclius:an
examinationoftheaimssourcesadworkingmethodsofSebeosandMovsesDaskhurantsi,inTheReign
ofHeraclius(610641):CrisisandConfrontation,ed.G.J.ReininkandB.H.Stolte,Peeters,Leuven,2002,pp.
4162;repr.ibid.,EastRome,SasanianPersiaandtheEndofAntiquity,AshgateVariorum,2006,no.V.
12
13

provides a sustained study of the relationship between Armenia and Sasanian Iran over a narrow
window of time, specifically 482485 CE. It offers considerable insight into a wide range of subjects,
including Sasanian military hierarchy, provincial administration and political culture. Yet it remains
the leaststudied section of the text. In an attempt to redress this, the following three case studies
illustrateitshistoricalpotential.
azarrecordsthattheArmenianrevoltwasinitiatedin482CE,whenbothGeorgia(ArmenianVirk)
and Albania (Armenian Auank) were experiencing political unrest.16 At that time, unspecified
ArmenianforceswerestationedinAlbaniaundertheoverallcommandofZarmihrhazarawuxt(Middle
Persianhazruft);theyhadbeensenttheretoquellunidentifiedrebelliousgarrisons.Theseforcesthen
returned to Armenian territory and attended before the marzpan of Armenia Atrvnasp Yozmandean
and the hazarapet (Middle Persian hazrbed) of Armenia, Vehvehnam. It is very tempting to interpret
thisencounter,betweenArmeniantroopsreturningafterserviceelsewhereandthelocalgovernor,asa
regular, established tradition, designed to foster ties and develop relations at the local level. On this
occasion however, it served as the occasion for the fomenting of rebellion. Moving forward in time,
whenVaar(Walx)resolvedtoseekanegotiatedsettlementwithVahanMamikoneanin484CE,he
dispatchedNikhorVnaspdat,acalmandjudiciousman,concernedforthewelfareoftheland.17First
contactwasmadewithVahanbyadelegationwhichincludedapuhkhorhrdeandpir,secretarytothe
council,andMihrVnaspuaratsi.18WhenVahanwenttomeetNikhorinperson,hewasmetbya
secondparty,comprisingBaz,ahap(MiddlePersianahrab)ofAtrpayakan,Vehnam,thehazarapetof
Armenia, Nersapuh, the brother of Mihran who had previously served in Armenia, and five other
seniorPersians.19TheuseofahapincombinationwithasingleprovincesupportsGyselensrecently
publishedreflectionsonthisprovincialoffice.20Whatisexceptionalisthatthisappearsinalatefifth
centurysource,forallotherreferencestothispositionoccurinprimarysourcesdatingfromthethird

azar,pp.118119;Thomson,Historyofazar,pp.171173.
azar,p.159;Thomson,Historyofazar,p.219:zayrhezewmtatsiewakharhan.
18azar,p.160;Thomson,Historyofazar,p.220.
19azar,p.164;Thomson,Historyofazar,pp.224225:zhingewsayraylawagParsiks.
20R.Gyselen,Nouveauxmatriauxpourlegographiehistoriquedelempiresassanide:Sceauxadministratifsdela
collectionAhmadSaeedi,StudiaIranicaCahier24,Associationpourlavancementdestudesiraniennes,
Paris,2002,pp.7577andpp.106110;R.Gyselen,SasanianSealsandSealingsintheA.SaeediCollection,
ActaIranica44,Peeters,Leuven,2007,pp.3542.
16
17

andfourth centuries.TheinvolvementofVehvehnamatthestartandtheendoftherebellionisalso
notable.Hisparticipationinthenegotiationswhichproducedthefinalsettlementlooksdeliberate.Not
only did he have recent experience of service in Armenia and hence knowledge of the Armenian
leadership; his presence may also have inspired confidence on the part of those leaders here was
someonewithwhomtheywerepersonallyacquainted.ThereforeinspiteoftheArmenianrebellion,in
the course of which his colleague, marzpan Atrvnasp Yozmandean, had been killed, it seems that
Vehvehnam had managed to hold on to his office.21 However, as we shall see below, failures by
servantsoftheSasanianstatewerenotalwaystolerated.
Secondly,thesettlementreachedbetweenNikhorandVahanMamikoneanincludedaprovisionthat
the native (Armenian bnik) Armenian cavalry should be dispatched to join the army being raised
againstZareh,sonofPrz.22ThecivilwarbetweenZarehandVaarisnotmentionedbyanyother
Armeniansource.ItisinstructivetonotethatVahanraisedandequippedthecavalryforceandplaced
itunderthecommandofVrnVanandatsi,althoughhisnephewGrigoralsotookpart.Withinayear
of the Armenian revolt, therefore, erstwhile rebel Armenian troops were serving Sasanian interests
outsideArmenia.Itistemptingtointerpretthisasareturntoanormalstateofaffairsafteratemporary
hiatusratherthanconstitutingaradicaldeparturefromthepreviouscourseofdealing.Thismayalso
be inferred from the immediate appointment of another Persian marzpan, Andekan, over Armenia.23
Andekans subsequent recommendation to Vaar, however, is decidedly atypical.24 He advised that
VahanMamikoneanhimselfbeappointedthenextmarzpanofArmenia.Andekanjustifiedhisopinion
ontwogrounds,bothofwhicharerevealing.FirstlyhearguedthatArmeniawasalargecountryand
that two or three years was insufficient time to acquaint oneself with the affairs of the land and its
inhabitants.Thisimpliesthatamarzpanstermofofficewasrelativelyshort,fixedattwoorthreeyears.
Presumablythispreventedthemfromdevelopingawebofpersonaltiesandaffiliationswhichmight
be exploited for subsequent political advantage. Secondly, Andekan noted that sending a Persian
(Armenianparsik)marzpanwouldinvolvesendinghiswife,children,household,friendsandservants,

FortheseeventsandhisdeathatthehandsofVasakMamikoneanandBabgnofSiwnik,seeazar,
pp.118124;Thomson,Historyofazar,pp.172179.
22azar,pp.171172;Thomson,Historyofazar,pp.232233.
23azar,p.177;Thomson,Historyofazar,p.239.
24azar,pp.177178;Thomson,Historyofazar,pp.239240.
21

all at the considerable expense of the lord of the Aryans, a phrase used repeatedly for the Sasanian
king.Andekanthendescribedthealternative,thatifthemarzpanandhisentourageweresustainedby
the country, this would do considerable damage to its inhabitants. By appointing Vahan, therefore,
VaarwouldbenefittheroyaltreasurybysavingonthecostofappointingaPersian.Itseemsthatin
485CE,marzpanscouldberemuneratedinoneoftwoways,eitherdirectlythroughthepaymentofa
stipend,orbybeingallowedfreereignovertheterritorytowhichtheyhadbeenappointed.
Finally,priortotherevoltitselfin482CE,VahanMamikoneanbecameembroiledinadisputeover
gold mines.25 azar reports that Vahan had an associate (Armenian gortsakits) called Vriw, of
insignificantfamilyandinexperienced,thesonofaSyrian.Beingunabletoconductthebusinessofthe
royal treasury, he attended before Prz (459484 CE) and accused Vahan of preventing him from
undertakinghisdutyinthegoldmines.Furthermore,heclaimedthatVahanhadseizedthegoldfor
himselfandwasplanningtogoeithertotheemperorortothelandoftheHuns,seekingtroopswith
which to mount a rebellion. Vahan in turn attended upon the king of kings and defended himself,
principally it seems by presenting Prz with a very large sum of gold. He was placated and Vahan
returnedtoArmenia.Whatshouldwemakeofthisepisode?Evidentlythegoldminesinquestionwere
locatedonlandcontrolledbyVahan,forthiswouldexplainhowhecouldpreventVriwfromgaining
accesstothem.ItseemsthatVriwwasresponsiblefortheextractionofthesegoldreservesonbehalfof
the royal treasury; this is both asserted in the text and can be inferred from the complaint delivered
before Peroz at the royal court. On the other hand, Vahan clearly had a role of some kind in the
enterprise,fortheactofpresentingthegoldbeforePrzwasdeemedsufficientfortheaccusationtobe
dismissed; there is no suggestion that he was acting beyond his remit. One possible solution is to
envisagethatVriwandVahanwerejointlyresponsiblefortheextractionofgoldfromthesereserves
within Armenia, Vriw as the treasury official and Vahan as the landowner. It is therefore highly
significant that Gyselen has recently identified two nearidentical seals which refer to the office of
zarrbed of Armin, Ardn, Wirzn, Ssagn and Marz [Nsawan], literally head of the gold of
Armenia,Auank,Georgia,SiwnikandthemarchofNesawan.26Althoughthedateofthesesealsis
unclear,thereferencetoSsagnasaseparateprovincemayoffersomeassistance,becauseitmaybe

azar,pp.117118;Thomson,Historyofazar,pp.170171.
Gyselen,Nouveauxmatriaux,p.31,pp.9193andpp.120122;Gyselen,SasanianSealsandSealings,p.44
andsealsI/165andI/166.
25
26

connected with the administrative separation of Siwnik from Armenia, mentioned above. There is
someevidencetosuggestthatthisoccurredduringthe550s;ithadcertainlyhappenedby571CE.Of
course,itisimpossibletoknowwhetherVriwheldtheofficeofzarrbed,norhowresponsibilityforgold
bullion within Sasaniancontrolled Armenia was first devolved, nor how it developed over time.
Neverthelessthecoincidencebetweenthetwocategoriesofevidenceprovidesanotherdemonstration,
ifanywereneeded,ofthehistoricalvalueofazarsHistoryforthestudyoftheSasanianworldinthe
latefifthcentury.
Although the History attributed to Sebeos does not offer such a detailed snapshot of Sasanian
governmentandadministrationatonepointintime,ittoopossessesgreatsignificance.Itsimportance
ishistoriographicalasmuchashistoricalincharacter.Thesinglemanuscriptpreservingthewholetext
includes an original heading made up of three elements: Chronological Work (Armenian Matean
amanakean);RoyalHistory(ArmenianPatmutiwntagaworakan);andAryannarrative(ArmenianVp
ariakan).27 Given the predominantly Sasanian focus of the first twothirds of the text, viewing events
through the lives and actions of successive Sasanian kings from Prz (459484 CE) to Yazdgerd III
(632651CE)inincreasingdetail,therearegoodgroundsforsupposingthatthecompilerexploitedan
anteriorcompositionwhichrecordedSasaniandynastichistory.28SeveralcharacteristicsofthisRoyal
Historymaybediscerned.ItwasstructuredaroundtheSasanianroyalline,adoptingabiographical
ratherthanannalisticframework.Lineage,personalityandinternalpoliticalaffairspredominate,with
conspicuousattentionpaidtotimesofsuccessionandpoliticalturmoil.Similarthemesaredeveloped
acrossthoseaccountsofSasanianhistorywhicharepreservedinninthandtenthcenturycompilations,
bothinArabicandPersian.Butsincetherearealsonumerousdifferencesbetweentheversions,bothin
termsofcontentandattitude,thesimplestsolutionistotreatallofthesetextsasreflectingthesame
Sasanianhistoriographicaltradition.Theycannotbetracedbacktoanysingleworkofhistory.Inthis
respect, the History attributed to Sebeos has a particular value. There is no doubt that this Armenian
textwascompiledinthemiddleoftheseventhcentury.ItthereforepredatesallthelaterArabicand
PersianaccountsofSasanianhistorybyatleasttwocenturies.Moreoveritsrapidobsolescenceensured
thatitwasneverreworkedorupdated.ItsreflectionofSasanianRoyalHistoryisthereforelikelytobe

Sebeos,p.72;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,p.13.
Forafullexplorationofthiscontention,seeGreenwood,SasanianEchoes,pp.327347.

27
28

close to the original. It seems that this genre of royal Sasanian history blended fact, anecdote and
imaginative reconstruction, rather than depending upon historical records or genuine eyewitness
accounts. In other words, Sasanian royal histories were lively literary compositions, fusing fact and
fiction to create a dynastic epic. They explored the personalities of the major participants in the
historicaldramaandtheirinteractions;theyrecordedconfrontationswithonesopponents,whetherin
single combat or by way of exchanges of letters or envoys; they described something of Sasanian
courtlyculture.
Instead of seeking a Pahlavi original underlying the version of Sasanian history preserved in the
History attributed to Sebeos, it seems more probable that it was composed in Armenian. At various
points, it betrays Armenian and Christian tinges. Thus in 591 CE, Xusr IIs rival for the throne,
Wahrmbn(ArmenianVahramMerhewandak),offerstheleadingArmenianprinceoftheday,Mue
Mamikonean,greatswathesofArmenianterritoryinreturnforhissupport.29Thomsonhasobserved
that this territorial outline bears an uncanny resemblance to the area purportedly converted by St
GrigortheIlluminator.30Oragain,theprovocativeletterallegedlysentbyXusrIItoHeracliusin624
CE is in fact based upon several pertinent biblical passages, notably Isaiahs description of
Sennacharibs ultimatum to king Hezekiah.31 Evidently this genre was fluid and could accommodate
local sensibilities and attitudes, even those that were Christian. We should perhaps envisage a basic
Sasaniannarrativefocus,ontowhichcouldbegraftedregionalorrivalinterests,especiallythoseofthe
greatest Persian families. The past was essentially plastic, to be appropriated and modified as
necessary.
AsidefromthepostulatedRoyalHistory,theHistoryattributedtoSebeoscontainsoneothersource
ofpossiblePersianprovenance,namelyalistofthePersiancommandersandgovernorsappointedto
Armenia.32 The consistent structure and language of four separate sequences indicates that this list
originallyextendedfromtheArmenianuprisingof572CEdowntothecrushingreversessufferedat

Sebeos,pp.7779;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,pp.2022.
ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,p.21andn.151.
31Sebeos,p.123;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,p.80andnn.496and498.
32Greenwood,SasanianEchoes,pp.358360.
29
30

the hands of the emperor Heraclius in 627 CE.33 These sequences were not integrated into the
surroundingpassages,therebydisruptingthechronologicalprogressionofthenarrative.Itisstriking
to note that those who undertook military campaigns within Armenia obtain much greater coverage
than those who held the office of marzpan during periods of peace. The sixteen years from the
appointment of Hratin Datan as marzpan in 586 CE is covered by a bare list of seven names. These
figuresarecalledsahmanakalk,literallyholdersofaborderorfrontier.Itistemptingtointerpretthis
asanArmeniancalqueontheMiddlePersianmarzpan.Oncemore,thelistimpliesthatmarzpanswere
appointedforafixedtermoftwoorthreeyears.Themilitarycommandershoweverwereevidentlynot
marzpans.Whatofficesdidtheyhold?AgaintherecentsigillographicresearchundertakenbyGyselen
throws up a very intriguing coincidence.34 One of the seals reveals that one rn sphbed of kust
Adurbdagn,thatisAryanCommanderoftheNorthernQuarter,borethenameGrgnMihranaswell
as the honorific title or epithet of hu>adagXusr, wellomened Xusr.35 It is very significant that,
accordingtoSebeos,thePersiancommanderappointedin573andsoduringthereignofXusrI(531
579CE)wasnamedGoonMihran.36ItseemshighlylikelythereforethatGoonMihranandGrgn
MihranrnsphbedofkustAdurbdagnareoneandthesame.Ifso,itisconceivablethatthelistof
commanders preserved within the History attributed to Sebeos is a sequence of sphbeds holding this
verycommand,oftheNorthernQuarter,kustAdurbdagn.Thelistpointstoarapidturnoverinthose
holdingthisseniorcommand,suggestingclosesupervisiononthepartofXusrIandhissonHormizd
IV(579590CE).ItisnotobviousfromthelistpreservedinSebeosHistorythattheyallcamefromthe
samenoblehouse.37
The History attributed to Sebeos also preserves passages from several princely biographies which
recorded the lives prominent Armenian nobles.38 Of these, it is the thirtyyear career of Smbat
BagratuniinfirstRomanandthenPersianservicewhichobtainsthegreatestcoverage.Onceagain,his

Sebeos,pp.7071;105;111and113;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,pp.10
12,56,6364and6667.
34Gyselen,SasanianSealsandSealings,pp.4652and248277.
35Gyselen,SasanianSealsandSealings,sealsIII/27andIII/28.
36Sebeos,pp.68and70;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,pp.7and1011.This
connectionhasalsobeenarguedbyPourshariati,DeclineandFall,pp.101104.
37ContraPourshariati,DeclineandFall,p.104.
38Greenwood,SasanianEchoes,pp.347358forafullstudy.ThebiographyofSmbatBagratuniis
discussedatpp.347352.
33

biography is a complex combination of apparently authentic and demonstrably fabulous episodes,

enablingSmbattobepresentedinanumberofcarefullycraftedcontexts.Thesepassagesillustratehow
anArmeniannobleattheendofthesixthcenturywishedtobeseen.Smbatisprojectedasafearless
warriorinsinglecombat,asapiousChristian,andasaloyalservantofXusrII.Thebroadcoincidence
with Sasanian dynastic historical writing outlined above is selfevident. The passages recording his
careerinSasanianservicearepreciseanddispassionate,recordinghisappointmentsandpromotions,
his campaigns against the enemies of Xusr II, both internal notably Wstahm (Armenian Vstam)
andexternalKushansandTurks.Theyalsodescribeinremarkabledetailthematerialandhonorific
rewardshereceivedfromagratefulsovereignonfourseparateoccasions.39Theseincludedanewname
forhimself,Khosrovum,JoyofXusr,andforhisson,JaviteanKhosrov,EternalXusr.40Intriguingly,
Smbat is not accorded a perfect record as a commander. His campaigns against the Kushans in
614/615, although ultimately successful, included a sharp defeat in a village called Khrokht. This
promptedanofficialinvestigationbyaroyalintendant,titledahrapanBandakanintheArmeniantext
butevidentlyatransliterationofahrabAnbandakan;heexoneratedSmbatbutaccusedthecommander
ofareliefforce,Datoyean,whowastakenbacktocourtandexecuted.41Itseemsthatbytheseventh
century,asophisticatedsystemofregulationandsupervisionwasinplace,whichscrutinizedmilitary
failure and punished those responsible. Previous good conduct or success counted for nothing, for
DatoyeanhadpreviouslyenjoyedanotablevictoryoverRomanforcesintheArmeniandistrictofirak
in607.42
This Armenian composition should therefore occupy a central place when approaching the late
Sasanian period. Not only does it preserve unmistakable traces of late Sasanian historical writing,
refractedthroughanArmenianlens,aswellasdocumentsreflectingSasanianadministrativepractice;
italsoofferawealthofrelevantdetail,particularlyonthereignofXusrII(590629CE),thelongyears
ofwarfare withtheRomanEmpire,thepoliticalinfightingwhichfollowedandmilitaryresponsesto
theArabincursions,includingthatofRostom(Rustam)sonofKhorokhOrmizd(FarroxHormizd)who

Sebeos,pp.96,99,101and103104;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,pp.43
44,4748,4950and5354.
40Similarhonorifictitleshavebeenidentifiedonseals,includingforexamplehujadagXusr,wellomened
XusrandhujadagOhrmazd,wellomenedHormizd:seeGyselen,SasanianSealsandSealings,pp.4753.
41Sebeos,pp.101102;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,pp.5052.
42Sebeos,p.108;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,pp.5960.
39

istitledprinceofAtrpatakan(surelysphbedkustAdurbdagn).43Moreoverthefullpotentialofthis
text has yet to be realized. Two instances will suffice. Firstly, Gyselen has recently deciphered two
sealingswhichbearthesealofthegundkadagxwadyanframdrofArmin,literally,thecommander
of the army of the houselords of Armenia.44 This seal therefore renders in Middle Persian the
Armenian tanuterakan gund. It is significant that in both the Histories of azar and Sebeos, the title of
tanutr is always awarded by the Sasanian king. In 484 CE, Vahan Mamikonean sought from Vaar
(Walx) the office of tanutr for a member of the Kamsarakan house, which was granted, and for a
memberoftheArtsruni house,whichwasrefused,pendingtheperformanceofsomeworthyservice
that was useful for the land of the Aryans.45 Smbat Bagratuni obtained a similar recognition from
Xusr II, as did his son Varaztirots from Kawd II in 628 CE.46 There is therefore a clear distinction
betweentr,thatislord,andtanutr,alordwhohasbeenofficiallyrecognizedassuchbytheSasanian
king. But who could the commander identified on the seal have been and how did he fit into the
Sasanianmilitaryhierarchy?Althoughcontentious,thissealappearstorecord,inPahlavi,theSasanian
equivalent term for the Armenian title sparapet, or commander in chief, who exercised a quasi
independent military authority over the other Armenian princely families. Arguably this seal
designated that Armenian prince who exercised leadership over those Armenian lords who were
recognizedclientsoftheSasanianking.Secondly,andmorebriefly,apassageinSebeosHistoryrefers
totheVaspurakannhamarakarn,translatedbyThomsonasauditorofVaspurakan.47Itseemsfarmore
likelythatthisisanArmeniantransliterationofWspuhragnframdr,commanderofwspuhragn,an
office expressed on six different seals.48 The History attributed to Sebeos refers elsewhere to the
Vaspurakan gund, and distinguishes it from the Tanuterakan tun when describing the territorial

Sebeos,p.130;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,p.89:orrikhankomants
Atrpatakani.
44Gyselen,Nouveauxmatriaux,pp.31and116,whereGyselenmakesasimilarobservation.Seealso
Gyselen,SasanianSealsandSealings,pp.44,5859andsealsI/100andI/101.
45azar,pp.175176;Thomson,Historyofazar,p.237.
46AwardedtoSmbatBagratuni:Sebeos,p.101;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,Historyattributedto
Sebeos,p.49;awardedtoVaraztirots:Sebeos,pp.128;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,Historyattributed
toSebeos,p.86.
47Sebeos,p.87;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,p.32andn.206.
48Gyselen,Nouveauxmatriaux,pp.31and119120;Gyselen,SasanianSealsandSealings,p.44andI/164.
43

concessions made by Xusr II to the emperor Maurice in 590 CE.49 It is possible that this term,
Vaspurakangund,wasemployedatthatdatetorepresentthatpartofArmeniawhichremainedunder
directSasaniancontrolaftertheconcession.Itseemsthatthereismuchofsignificanceforscholarsof
theSasanianworldwithintheHistoryattributedtoSebeoswhichhasyettobeuncovered.
ThethirdkeyArmeniantextinthissurveyisthePatmutiwnAuanits,orHistoryofAuank,whose
authorshipremainscontentious.Intheabsenceofanynewevidence,aconclusiveidentificationofthe
compilerisimpossibleandsoheshouldbestyledanonymous.Hisdecisiontofocusupontheterritory
of Auank, that is Caucasian Albania (Ardn/Arran) to the east of historic Armenia, suggests an
affinitywiththatcountry,althoughtheworkitselfisentirelyinArmenian.Thereisstrongevidencefor
thepropositionthatthetextishomogeneousinthesenseofbeingasinglecompositionpiecedtogether
byasingleeditor.Thereforethetextasawholeisaproductofthetenthcentury.Moreoveritishighly
likelythatitwascompiledattheverystartofthetenthcentury,probablybefore914CEandcertainly
before919CE.50Thisbeingso,therecanbenodirectreflectiononcontemporaryaffairsasfoundinthe
twoothercompositions.Howeverclosestudyoftheworkasawholeindicatesthatthecompilerdid
not rewrite the material available to him but chose to paste together passages from his underlying
sources without amendment. Although this produced internal contradiction, it also enables the
individualsectionstobediscerned.
For the purposes of this survey, book II has the greatest significance. Seven chapters record the
confrontation between Xusr II and Heraclius in the years 624628 CE and its impact upon Auank,
includingthedevastatingimpactofTurkicforcesfromthenorthandtheeffortsoftheCatholicosViroy
tonegotiateasettlementwiththem.51Thefocusthenshiftstothenotabledeedsandvirtuousconduct
of a prince of Auank named Juanr. No fewer than thirteen chapters are devoted to his career, of
whichthefirsttwoholdsignificanceforthisstudy.52ThisbeganwithloyalservicetoYazdgerdIIIand
military action at the battle of Qadisiyya, in the course of which he was wounded. Subsequently, he
wasrewardedwithvaluableitemsandrichclothing.Hethenparticipatedinacivilwarbetweentwo

Sebeos,p.84;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,pp.2829.
T.W.Greenwood,AHistoryofArmeniaintheseventhandeighthcenturies,D.PhilThesis,Oxford,2000,
chapter3.HowardJohnstonacceptstheidentificationofMovssDaskhurantsiascompilerandprefersa
latetenthcenturydate:seeArmenianhistorians,pp.5051.
51PatmutiwnAuanits,pp.127166;Dowsett,HistoryoftheCaucasianAlbanians,pp.75102.
52PatmutiwnAuanits,pp.172181;Dowsett,HistoryoftheCaucasianAlbanians,pp.109116.
49
50

generalsinMediaandHamadan,followingwhichhewasrewardedbyoneofthem,namedKhorazat
in this text and Khorokhazat in the History attributed to Sebeos.53 This is none other than Rustams
brother, Khorrzad (Xwarrahzd/Farrukhzd). After seven years of loyal service and hardfought
battles in the course of which he sustained eleven serious wounds, Juanr retired northwards to
Atrpatakan(Adurbdagn).HerehewasimportunedbythePersiangeneral,almostcertainlythesame
figure, the sphbed kust Adurbdagn, Khorrzad, to marry his sister but he declined and returned to
Auank.HefoundhimselfengagedinabitterstruggleagainstPersianforces(ArmeniankajknParsits
andgundnParsits)movingnorthfromAtrpatakan.54Evidentlythetextisdescribingthefragmentation
of the Sasanian empire and it seems that Juanr was pitched against his erstwhile commander,
Khorrzad. If Juanr entered the service of Yazdgerd III in the autumn of 637 CE and retired seven
yearslater,theseengagementsagainstPersianforcesfromAtrpatakanbeganin644CEandlastedforat
least a year. In one of the battles, in the district of akan, Juanr killed hazarawors with their
contingents;againthisseemstobeindicatingthecommandersholdingtherankofhazrbed/hazruft.55
TheoutcomeofthiswarfareisnotreportedinthetextbuttheveryfactthatJuanrrecoveredcontrol
ofAuankandretaineditforthenexttwodecadesatleastimpliesthatKhorrzadfailedinhisattempt
toexpandnorthwards.
Ontheotherhand,ifweadvanceintoBookIII,wefindthatthesignatoriestoasetofecclesiastical
documentsdatingfromc.704CEincludedthefollowing:
Bab i Hrahatean [descended] from the princes of Atrapatakan who settled in Kapalak and in Kot;
VahaniVarazYohanean,[descended]fromthefamiliesofMadianatsik[inhabitantsofMadin,that
isCtesiphon],infaithYakobit[Jacobite,thatisSyrianOrthodox,miaphysiteChristian]whocameand
settled in Kambian; Rostom i Varaz Akoyean, [descended from those] from Stahr in the province
Pars, settled in the province of Uti in the town of Kaankatuk; Zarmihr i Varaz Kordakean and
Mahmatieroyean,sonsofthelordsofDmunk,theyweresettledonDmahos,[land]givenbythe
king,inthiscountryofAuank56

ThesefigureswereevidentlydescendedfromdisplacedPersians;thereisnoobviousgeographicalor
social pattern to this group. What is surprising is that they all continued to define themselves by
referencetotheirPersianancestryandorigin,suggestingthattheycontinuedtothinkofthemselvesas

zravarnKhorazat:PatmutiwnAuanits,p.176.3;zravarnKhorokhazat:Sebeos,p.137.22.
PatmutiwnAuanits,p.177;Dowsett,HistoryoftheCaucasianAlbanians,p.113.
55zhazaraworshanderdziwreantsgndiwn:PatmutiwnAuanits,p.179.12.
56PatmutiwnAuanits,pp.304305;Dowsett,HistoryoftheCaucasianAlbanians,pp.197198.
53
54

Persian.OneassertedaconnectionwithAdurbdagnandanotherwithDiumn,districtstothesouth
andeastofAuank,buttworetainedmemoriesofanurbanorigin,CtesiphonandStahrrespectively.
CouldtheyhavebeeninvolvedintheevacuationofCtesiphonundertakenbyKhorrzadin639or640
CE?
This brief outline illustrates the considerable value that this text possesses for seventhcentury
Sasanianhistory.Asmentionedpreviouslytherehasbeendisagreementamongscholarsovertheexact
form in which these passages were transmitted. HowardJohnston accepted Akopyans proposition,
that the seventhcentury material arrived in the hands of the anonymous compiler in a single
composition.57 This postulated source, designated the 684 History by Akopyan, is renamed the 682
History by HowardJohnston.58 Both infer that the abrupt conclusion to the work was caused by the
irruption of the Khazars across the Caucasus in 685 CE. Zuckerman and Greenwood have adopteda
moreconservativeapproach,definingclustersofmaterialbutshyingawayfrombundlingthemallinto
alateseventhcenturycompilation.59Forthepurposesofthissurvey,however,twopostulatedsources
can be identified, examples of which have been encountered previously. The first is a work focused
upon Sasanian dynastic history to which an Auan tinge has been imparted, probably through
combinationwithabiographyofthecatholicosViroy.Thispossessesmanysimilaritiestothesocalled
Royal history, which, it was argued above, can be dimly discerned within the History attributed to
Sebeos.ThesecondisaheroicbiographyofJuanr.Incontentandcharacter,againthisisremarkably
close to the biography of Smbat Bagratuni, which was exploited extensively in that historical
compilation. In the light of these parallels, ideally the History attributed to Sebeos and the History of
AuankshouldbeexaminedtogetherwhenstudyingthelateSasanianera.Theyoftencorroborate,and
sometimescomplement,oneanother.
ThesethenarethethreeArmeniantextswhichshouldformthebasicframeworkforanysustained
analysisofSasanianIran.Admittedlytheydonotcoverthethirdandfourthcenturiesandthereisan

A.Akopyan(Hakobyan),AlbaniiaAluankvgrekolatinskhikhidrevnearmianskikhistochnikakh,Yerevan,
1987,pp.190201;HowardJohnston,Armenianhistorians,pp.5455.
58HowardJohnston,Armenianhistorians,pp.5556.
59Greenwood,AHistoryofArmenia,chapter3andC.Zuckerman,TheKhazarsandByzantium:TheFirst
Encounter,inTheWorldoftheKhazars:Newperspectives,ed.P.B.Golden,H.BenShammaiandA.Rna
Tas,HandbuchderOrientalistik8AbteilungHandbuchofUralicStudies17,Brill,Leiden,2007,pp.399
432.
57

unfortunatelacunaforthefirstsevendecadesofthesixthcentury.Ontheotherhand,collectivelythey
holdouttheprospectofallowingpoliticalandinstitutionaldevelopmenttobedetected.Tooffertwo
examples, azar refers repeatedly to the office of hazarapet of Armenia; Sebeos and the History of
Auankdonotmentionthisoffice,atleastnotinanArmenianorAuancontext.Whynot?Oragain,in
azars History, the city of Dvin is called the bnakan ostan of Armenia, the capital.60 Despite this, the
impressiononegainsfromthetextisthatthisisasettlementwhichisnotheavilyfortified.Themarzpan
Atrvnasp and the hazarapet Vehvehnam flee to the fortress (Armenian berd) of Artaat on the river
Araxes when fleeing from Vahan Mamikonean rather than to Dvin.61 There is no account of any
militaryactiononthepartofVahanforpossessionofthecity.YetitclearlyservedasVahansbaseof
operations;hereturnedtoDvinafterattendinguponVaar.62Ifwemoveforwardacentury,andthe
HistoryattributedtoSebeos,Dvinisclearlyfortified.In572CE,theArmenianrebelsattackedthecityof
DvinandexpelledthePersiantroopsfollowingasiege.63Moreover,whenSmbatBagratuniattempted
to rebuild the Churchof St Gregory in 608 CE, the Persian commander of the fortress complained to
XusrIIthatitwould betooclosetothefortressandwouldjeopardizesecurity.64ThereafterDvinis
bothfortifiedandaprincipaltarget,attestedbythefirstArabraidintoArmeniainautumn640CE.65
When and why did Dvin develop into a key defensive position? Is it a reaction to the extensive
program of Roman fortification along the frontier undertaken during the reign of Anastasias or
Justinian?OrcoulditbelinkedwiththenetworkofsixthcenturySasaniandefencesintheCaucasus,of
whichthegreatwallatDerbend,guardingtheCaspiancoastagainstincursionfromthenorth,isthe
bestknownexample.
What of other Armenian sources? Rather than giving an exhaustive list, the following offers brief
commentsuponindividualpassagesofparticularsignificancefoundintwoothertexts,aswellasthe
potential contribution of a large collection of letters and documents known in Armenian as the Girk
TtotsorBookofLetters.Separatetranslationsofthetwopassagesappearsasappendicestothisstudy.

azar,p.141;Thomson,Historyofazar,p.199.
azar,p.121;Thomson,Historyofazar,p.175.
62azar,p.176;Thomson,Historyofazar,p.239.
63Sebeos,p.67;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,p.6andn.32andpp.162163.
64Sebeos,p.100;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,pp.4849.
65Sebeos,pp.138139;ThomsonandHowardJohnston,HistoryattributedtoSebeos,pp.100101.
60
61

The first passage (Appendix I) is found in a seventhcentury Armenian geographical compilation

known as the Akharhatsoyts.66 For a long time, this work was associated, erroneously, with Movss
Khorenatsi,butitisnowattributed,onstrongerbutfarfromcompellinggrounds,toaseventhcentury
Armenianpolymath,Ananiairakatsi.67ThispassageislocatedtowardstheendofthesocalledLong
Recension of that text and defines the four divisions of the Sasanian empire, along with their
constituent provinces.68 The disruption caused by this passage to the flow of the surrounding
description, together with another, older description of Iran shortly afterwards, confirm that it is an
interpolation,extractedfromanothersourcewhichdoesnototherwisecontributetothetext.Crucially,
it employs Middle Persian terms for the four divisions, each of which have been transliterated into
ArmenianandwhicharequalifiedbyanArmeniantranslation:hence,forexample,KustiKhoraban,
whichisthesideofthewest,inwhichtherearenineprovinces(Armenianakharhk,strictlycountries
butreadasPahlaviahr,province).ThefourthoftheseappearsunfamiliarbecausethetextreadsKust
iKapkoh,whichisthesideoftheKawkasmountains,inwhichtherearethirteenakhahrHowever
thelistwhichfollowstotalsfourteen.ThefirstprovincetobementionedisAtrapatakan.Inmyopinion,
the text has become slightly corrupted at this point, with Atrapatakan being misplaced in the list of
provinces and the anomalous Kapkoh, itself deriving from Kawkas, taking its place. The original
wouldhavereadasfollows:KustiAtrapatakan,whichisthesideoftheKawkasmountains,inwhich
there are thirteen akhahr. Furthermore, we find that the Persian names for particular Caucasian
provinces again require Armenian equivalents: Armn (which is) Hayk, Varjan, which is Virk, Ran
whichisAuank.Theneedtodefinethese,especiallyArmn,isverystriking.Inmyview,therecan
belittledoubtthatthisadministrativesummarywasoriginallyinPahlavi.Althoughthecircumstances
under which it was translated into Armenian cannot be determined, its inclusion within the
Akharhatsoyts demonstrates that Pahlavi documents were available and accessible to Armenian
writers. It offers a powerful reminder that Middle Persian would have been widely known across

AkharhatsoytsMovsesiKhorenatswoy,ed.A.Soukry,Venice,1881;repr.withafacsimileoftheunique
manuscriptuponwhichitwasbased,inAshkharhatsoyts,ed.R.H.Hewsen,DelmarNY,1994.English
translationandcommentaryinR.H.Hewsen,TheGeographyofAnaniasofirak(Axarhacoyc)TheLong
andShortRecensions,BeiheftezumTbingerAtlasdesVorderenOrients,ReiheB,Nr.77,Wiesbaden,
1992.
67Hewsen,Geography,pp.715.
68Akharhatsoyts,p.40;Hewsen,Geography,p.72.
66

ArmeniainthelateSasanianperiod,althoughalmostnotraceofitcanbefoundinthesurvivingtexts.
TothisendhoweveritisinterestingtonotethatCatholicosViroyofAuankisdescribedintheHistory
ofAuankasbeingparticularlyfluentintranslatingthePersianlanguage,aconsequenceofhavingbeen
detainedfortwentyfiveyearsatthePersiancourt.69
ThesecondshortpassageappearsinalateseventhcenturyArmeniantext,commonlyknownasthe
AnanumamanakagrutiwnorAnonymousChronicle.70ItcomprisesaSasaniankinglist.Itextendsfrom
Artir i Sasanean (Ardaxr), fifty to Khosrov Ormzdean (Xusr II), thirtynine.71 Although the
sequence is not complete, and some of the figures for the duration of individual reigns are now
hopelesslywrong,itdoesnotderivefromanyextantArmenianhistoricaltext.Itincludesseveralvery
shortlivedkings:Ormzdiaphean(HormizdI,271272CE),four;Artiriaphean(ArdaxrII,379
383CE),fourandZamaspiPerozay(Zmsp,496498CE),two.Moreover,ascanbeseenfromthe
individual entries already cited, every king is identified with his patronymic, the name of his father.
Each one of these is found to be correct. Therefore, in my opinion, this freestanding list of Sasanian
kingsalsoreflectsaPahlavioriginal;thereareseveralindicationsinthelinguisticformsofthenames
thatthelistwastransliteratedintoArmenianfromPahlaviratherthantranslated.Thefulllistappears
asAppendixII.
Atfirstglance,theArmeniancollectionofecclesiasticalcorrespondenceknownastheGirkTtots
or Book of Letters is not an obvious choice for inclusion in this survey.72 The letters, inevitably, are
predominantlytheologicalincharacterandhavelittledirectbearinguponourknowledgeofSasanian

PatmutiwnAuanits,p.150;Dowsett,HistoryoftheCaucasianAlbanians,p.93.
Ananunamanakagrutiwn,ed.B.Sargisean,Surbazar,Venice,1904,pp.180;
Ananiairakatsumatenagrutyun,ed.A.G.Abrahamyan,Matenadaranihratarakutyun,Erevan,1944)
pp.35799.Thistexthasneverbeentranslatedinfullbutanextendedanalysisofthetexthasbeen
publishedrecently:seeT.W.Greenwood,NewLightfromtheEast:ChronographyandEcclesiastical
HistorythroughalateseventhcenturyArmenianSource,JournalofEarlyChristianStudiesvol.16.2,2008,
pp.197254.
71Ananunamanakagrutiwn,p.30;Ananiairakatsumatenagrutyuni,pp.375376.SeeGreenwood,New
Light,pp.221222.
72 Girk Ttots (Book of Letters), ed. Y. Izmireants, Tparan T. Rtineants and M. arats, Tiflis, 1901;
secondedition,N.Poarean,TparanSrbotsHakobeants,Jerusalem1994.Asubstantialnumberofthese
letters have been translated into French by Garsoan: see N.G Garsoan, Lglise armnienne et le grand
schisme dOrient, Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium vol. 574, Subsidia tome 100, Louvain,
1999,pp.411583.
69
70

Iran. Nevertheless there are several important exceptions whose value has not perhaps been fully
appreciated.Twogroupsofmaterialinparticularrepaycloseattention.
Thefirst,comprisingoftwoletters,tracethecircumstancesanddecisionsofthefirstCouncilofDvin
in505/506CE.73ThiswasattendedbyadelegationofPersianclericsfromoutsideArmenia.Theyhad
obtained a royal decree (tagaworakan hrovartak) from Kawat, king of kings (Kawd I 488496,498531
CE)toaddressthesynodandexaminetheirconfessionoffaith.Oneofthelettersrecordsthenamesof
thesevisitorsandfromwheretheycame,includingCtesiphon,theprovinceofKarmikan[Garmgn]
andthetownofPerozapuh[Przhpr]intheprovinceofVehartair.Thedelegationisrecordedas
stating:
WearetheservantsofKawat,kingofkings,andforthesakeofthewellbeingofthekingandallwho
areunderhissovereignty,wedevoteourselvestothebestofourabilities,constantlyimploringGod[to
grantthem]health,peaceandlonglifeandallsimilarblessings.74

WealsolearnthatthereplytothisletterwaswritteninbothArmenianandPersianandsealedwiththe
sealsoftheArmeniancatholicos,Babgn,alltheArmenianbishopsaswellasVardMamikonean,then
marzpanofArmeniaandtheassembledprincesandnobles.Clearlytheselettersrepaycarefulscrutiny
forwhattheyrevealabouttheorganizationandloyaltiesofChristiancommunitiesacrossIranatthe
startofthesixthcenturyaswellastheinterventionoftheSasaniangovernmentinoverseeingdoctrinal
debateswithinitsterritories.
Asecondclusteroflettersanddocumentsdatingfromthestartoftheseventhcenturyofferssimilar
possibilities.Nofewerthantwentysevenletterstracetheprogressivebreakdowninrelationsbetween
the Armenian and Iberian churches, ending in permanent breach. 75 Several contentious issues were
raised and then developed, ranging from specific grievances the disciplining of the dissident, and
irascible,bishopMovssofTsurtaw;theworshipoftherelicsofStuanikinArmeniantobroader
doctrinalconfrontation.76Itisstrikingtonotethatafter606CEthequarrelgainedapoliticaldimension.

Thetwoletters:seeGirkTtots,Tiflis,1901,pp.4147andpp.4852;GirkTtots,Jerusalem,1994,
pp.147156andpp.157162.Frenchtranslation:seeGarsoan,Lglisearmnienne,AppendixII,pp.438
450.ForafullanalysisofthisCouncil,seeGarsoan,Lglisearmnienne,pp.135195.
74GirkTtots,Tiflis,1901,p.43;GirkTtots,Jerusalem,1994,pp.149150;Garsoan,Lglise
armnienne,p.193andAppendixII,pp.441442.
75SeeGarsoan,Lglisearmnienne,AppendixVI,pp.506583.
76Forafullstudyofthiscorrespondence,seeGreenwood,ArmenianChurch(Forthcoming).
73

TheArmeniancatholicosAbrahamIinformedhisIberiancounterpartKiwrionthatitisimpossiblefor
servantsofthekingofkingstobeofonefaithwithservantsofforeignkingsandtodetachthemselves
from coreligionists of their own country.77 Kiwrion fashioned a very subtle reply, arguing that our
fathersandyourswereservantsofthekingofkingsandtheyadheredtothefaithofJerusalem,justas
Iberianswerecontinuingtodo.78Hecontinued:
Forjustastheskyandtheearthexists,therehasnotbeenanylordwhohaspermittedeachpeopleto
have its own religion as this lord [ie the king of kings] has tolerated, especially the faith of other
Christianssuchasourselves,andourcountryasfreelyasanyotherAndthekingofkingsislordof
the Romans as much as the land of the Aryans, and they are not, as you have written, two distinct
kingdoms.79

Inotherwords,notonlydoesXusrIIpermitfreedomofworship;heisinfactlordoftheRomansand
so Abrahams premise, that the Roman and Sasanian kingdoms are distinct, is invalid. This offers a
remarkable insightintocontemporarySasanianpoliticaltheoryatthestartoftheseventhcentury,or
ratheritsexpressionandelaborationinaCaucasiancontext.
Finally two letters associated with the Armenian Catholicos Komitas (610628 CE) illustrate
somethingofthefavorshownbyXusrIItowardsanexpandingmiaphysiteconfessionandawayfrom
the Nestorian Church of the East which had previously enjoyed a privileged position. This first was
addressedtoagroupofnineclericsfromtheChurchoftheEastwhowishedtoembracethemiaphysite
confessionpracticedbytheArmenianChurchunderKomitas.80Itcomprisesaremarkableconfession
of faith, supported by patristic authorities, a version of church history and fifteen anathemas. The
circumstancesinwhichthisoccurredareoutlinestowardstheendoftheletter:
Withthesame,thegatesofthekingdomofheavenwereentrustedtohim,tobindandtosetfreein
heavenandonearth,towhichyoushallbecomesonsandheirsofhisthrone,throughorthodoxfaith
anddeedsandconfession,Kambioy,metropolitan,PosbishopofAruestan,GabrilbishopofTaik,
YovhanbishopofHerit[Hrt],SimonbishopofNineveh,GabrilbishopofKarim,Sabasisoybishop
of{Kohi}ni[k]horakan,BenjaminbishopofSrnig,StepanosbishopofArzinandmanyotherbishops,

GirkTtoc,Tiflis,1901,p.165;GirkTtoc,Jerusalem1994,p.317;Garsoan,Lglisearmnienne,p.
549.
78GirkTtoc,Tiflis,1901,p.166;GirkTtoc,Jerusalem1994,p.320;Garsoan,Lglisearmnienne,pp.
550551.
79GirkTtoc,Tiflis,1901,p.167;GirkTtoc,Jerusalem1994,p.321;Garsoan,Lglisearmnienne,p.
551.
80GirkTtots,Tiflis,1901,pp.212219(incomplete);GirkTtots,Jerusalem,1994,pp.400413.No
translationofthisletterhasbeenpublished.
77

together with fellowbishops and deacons and the covenant of the holy Church, you who have
requestedthefaithoftheChristlivingArmenians,youwhohavearrivedatthegateoftheking.

From your demand, at the command of lords, I Komitas, bishop of the Mamikoneans who have
succeeded to the office of katuikos of Greater Armenia, I have given this deed wholeheartedly and
withsurefaithbeforemanynakhararsofArmeniaandotherChristianpeoples,whohadarrivedatthe
royalcourt,especiallybeforethegreattanutrcalledKhosrovnum,whosenameisknown,Smbatfrom
thelineoftheBagratunik.81

Thesecond,datedtothe27thyearofXosrovAbruz,kingofkings,sonofOrmizd,comprisesashort
declarationoffaithmadebytwobishopsfromAsorestan,MarMarutaandPetros,ontheoccasionofa
visit to Dvin.82 Their doctrinal orthodoxy is coupled with an open acknowledgement of the
ecclesiasticaloversightandauthorityofKomitas.
By way of conclusion, this survey will outline the contribution of two Armenian inscriptions. Full
translationsoftheseappearinAppendixIII.83Theearliestoftheseinscriptionsusedtobelocatedinthe
architraveabovethetympanumofthewesternentrancetothechurchatTekor.Unfortunatelyitwas
destroyed along with the church at the start of the twentieth century, but not before it had been
photographed and impressed. The inscription is not only cramped but has clearly been inverted, so
that it makes sense when read in reverse, starting with the last line of text and moving upward.
Furthermore a close reading of the inscription suggests that it is in fact composite, formed from two
separate inscriptions. The first refers to the action of Sahak Kamsarakan building a martyrium of St
Sahak;theseconddescribeshowthissitewasfoundedbythecatholicosofArmeniaYohan.Evidently
thetwoinscriptionsderivefromseparatestructuresorfromdistinctelementswithinasinglestructure.
ThekeyquestionhoweveriswhichcatholicosYovhannsisbeingreferredto:YovhannsIMandakuni,
catholicosbetween478and490CE,orYovhannsIIGabeean,catholicosbetween557/8and574CE?
The reference to Manan hazarapet is of particular significance for the dating of this inscription. As
argued above, this office is a consistent feature of azars History but is not found in early seventh
century Armenian texts. Therefore it seemsmore probable thatthetext of this part of the inscription

GirkTtots,Tiflis,1901,p.218;GirkTtots,Jerusalem,1994,p.412.
TheletterisfoundintheHistoricalCompilationorChronographyofSamuelofAni:seeSamulikahanay
AnetswoyHawakmunkigrotspatmagrats,ed.A.TrMikelean,TparanEjmiatsin,Vaarapat,1893,pp.
290291.
83ForafullstudyoftheseandotherseventhcenturyArmenianinscriptions,seeT.W.Greenwood,A
corpusofearlyMedievalArmenianInscriptions,DumbartonOaksPapersvol.58,2004,pp.2791.
81
82

dates from the end of the fifth century. It is worth remembering that Vahan Mamikonean was
appointedasmarzpanofArmeniain485CE.ItisthereforeconceivablethatMananhazarapetwasalso
Armenian who served in Vahans administration, rather than a Persian. If so, the inscription would
datefromtheperiodbetween485and490CE.
ThesecondinscriptionatthechurchofBagaranhasalsobeendestroyed.Itencircledtheexteriorof
the whole building, being carved as a single line of text onto the topmost row of prepared masonry
blockslocatedimmediatelybelowtheleveloftheroof.Towardstheendoftheinscription,itseemsthat
the carver reverted to two lines of text, probably due to lack of space. Again this suggests that the
inscription comprises two parts, the second of which necessitated the switch to two lines. For the
purposesofthisstudy,thesignificanceofthisinscriptionliesinitsdatingformula,foritemploysthe
regnal years of Xusr II. The church was founded in the thirtyfourth year of King Khosrov and its
founder,lordButArueean,wasmurderedinhisthirtyeighthyear.84Sasanianregnalyearswereused
consistentlytolocateeventsintimethroughoutthethreeprincipalArmeniantextsdiscussedabove.85
There is even a solitary extant colophon preserved in a thirteenthcentury miscellany inviting the
reader to remember Eznak who translated this book, in the twentyninth year of Khosrov king of
kings, son of Ormizd.86 Sasanian regnal years were employed throughout the ecclesiastical
correspondence preserved in the Girk Ttots or Book of Letters. For example, a profession of faith
obtained by Smbat Bagratuni from a gathering of bishops was made in the seventeenth year of
KhosrovApruz,kingofkings,inthemonthofMareri,i.e.between25Marchand23April606CE.87
Onoccasionhoweveritseemsthatthedatingformulacouldbeevenmoresophisticated.Onemidsixth
centuryletterrecordstheconstructionofachurchbyNestoriansinDvinitself:Intheseventeenthyear
ofKhosrovkingofkings(548CE),duringthemarzpanateofNihorakan,theyconstructedabuildingin
the name of Manair Raik.88 This synchronism, correlating a Sasanian regnal yearwith a provincial

Year34ofXusrII:19June622CE18June623CE;year38:18June626CE17June627CE.
Forexample,oftwentyspecificdatesfoundintheHistoryattributedtoSebeos,nofewerthanfourteen
arebasedexclusivelyuponSasanianregnalyears.
86A.S.Matevosyan,Hayerenjeragrerihiatakaranner(512dd),Erevan,1988,no.19.Twentyninthyear:20
June617CE19June618CE.
87GirkTtoc,Tiflis,1901,p.149;GirkTtoc,Jerusalem1994,p.296;Garsoan,Lglisearmnienne,p.
512.
88GirkTtoc,Tiflis,1901,p.72;GirkTtoc,Jerusalem1994,p.200;Garsoan,Lglisearmnienne,p.228
andn.283andpp.476477.
84
85

governor, imparts a local provincial character to the dating formula. Likewise, when the church of
Bagaranwascompleted,probablyon8October629,whentheSasanianworldwasengulfedbypolitical
flux,itistellingthatthefoundationinscriptionalsoelectstousethemarzpanofArmenia,inthiscase
Varaztirots Bagratuni, son of Smbat Bagratuni, as the principal chronological marker. This
combination, of Sasanian regnal year and provincial official, supports two separate contentions,
advancedpreviously,thatlistsofSasaniankingsandtheirreignsandlistsofprovincialgovernorswere
maintainedandusedtoorientateandcalculatetime.Byimplication,Armenianwriterswereconscious
that they lived in Sasanian time; there is no hint of the local Armenian era developing before the
middleoftheseventhcenturyandthefinaldemiseoftheSasaniandynasty.
The above survey illustrates the considerable potential of Armenian sources for the study of the
Sasanianworld.ThreeArmenianhistoricalcompositionshavebeenhighlightedasdeservingparticular
attention, although the value of other sources, including several littleexploited works, has also been
noted. This material has been introduced and considered in the context of a broader interpretative
framework which stresses the need to privilege certain sources over others and to pay attention to
dissonanceanddevelopmentovertime.IftherelationshipbetweenArmeniaandtheSasanianworld
was as fluid as this survey have suggested, we can expect to find traces of those changes, however
faint,withinthesurvivingsourcematerial.

AppendixI
TheFourDivisionsoftheSasanianEmpireasrecordedintheLongRecension
oftheGeography(Akharhatsoyts)ofAnaniaofirak

ThistranslationhasbeenmadefromtheonlypublishededitionofthelongrecensionoftheGeography
attributed to Anania of irak: Gographie de Moise de Corne daprs Ptolme, ed. and tr. A. Soukry,
Venice1881,p.40.Itwaspublishedatatimewhenthetextwasstillconsideredtohavebeencompiled
byMovssKhorenatsi,hencetheotherwiseconfusingtitle.Hewsenreexaminedthesinglemanuscript
of the long recension, Venice 1245, when preparing his own English translation and commentary on
bothrecensions:forhistranslation,seeR.H.Hewsen,TheGeographyofAnaniasofirak(Axarhacoyc)
TheLongandShortRecensions,Wiesbaden,1992,p.72.Hewsensuppliesafullintroduction,translation
andcommentary,althoughthispassagereceivedlittleanalysis,saveinoneimportantrespect.Atp.13,
Hewsenarguesthattheterminusadquemforthelongrecensioncannotbelaterthan636CEforthiswas
theyearinwhichthePersianEmpirewasdestroyedbytheArabs.Thisseemsanunnecessarilyfirm
date, and implies a degree of foresight on the part of the author, that the collapse of the Sasanian
Empire was inevitable and that its provincial organization was therefore redundant. This seems
unlikely.OnlyafterthedeathofYazdgerdIIIin651CEdoesthecompileroftheHistoryattributedto
Sebeos comment on the end of the Sasanian line. Arguably therefore, this passage could have been
insertedatanytimebefore651CE,whenrecognitionoftheirdemiseisfirstassertedinacontemporary
Armenian text. The separation of Armn and Sisakan also points to a date before 655 CE. Moreover,
since the rhythms of institutional change are slow, it seems overhasty to envisage the sudden and
complete collapse of the Sasanian provincial network at the outset of the Arab campaigns. The
omissionofthispassagefromtheShortRecensionneednotpointtoanimmediaterevisionafterthose
events.Iremainunconvincedthattherewasaradicallydifferentprovincialgovernmentinplaceover
theerstwhileSasanianEmpirebeforetheendoftheseventhcenturyattheearliest.

29.ThecountryofPersia.ThecountryofPersiaisdividedintofour,asfollows:

Kust i Xoraban, which is the side of the west, in which [there are] nine provinces: Maymaspatn,
Mihrankatak,Karkar,Parmakan,Eran[a]sanKarKawat,Notartay,irakan,Maydzinsteh

KustiNmroj,whichisthemeridianside,whichisthesouth,inwhich[thereare]nineteenprovinces:
Pad, Xuastan, Aspahan, Mienhagar, Anatrir, Kurman, Turan, Magwian, Sndasrman, Spet, Vat,
Sakastan,Zaplastan,Ger,anislandinthesea,Mmakhik,thistooisanisland,Maazun,Xuihrstan,
Spahl,takenfromtheIndians,Debuhl,likewisetakenfromtheIndians.

KustiXorasan,whichisthesideoftheeast,inwhich[thereare]twentysixprovinces,namelywhatI
say: Ahmadan, Kom, Varkan, Aprahr, Mrv, Mrot, Hraw, Kataan, Nsai, Mianakabin, Takan,
Gozkan,Andapd,Vept,Hrumazamb,Paroz,Nahrir,Dzinazak,Varan,Maan,Gakstan,Bahlibamik,
Drmatavariman,Kanr,Ibamikan,Gozbon.

KustiAtrapatakan,whichisthesideoftheCaucasusmountains,inwhichtherearethirteenprovinces:
Armn[whichis]Hayk,Varjan,whichisVirk,Ran,whichisAuank,Balasakan,Sisakan,Ar,Gean,
anan,Dlmunk,Dmbawand,Taprstan,Rwan,Aml,whichwearegoingtorelate.

AppendixII
SasanianKingList

ThisfreestandinglistofSasaniankingsistranslatedhereforthefirsttimefromalateseventhcentury
Armeniansource,knownvariouslyastheAnonymousChronicleortheChroncileofAnaniaofirak.Ithas
been published twice: B. Sargisean, Ananun amanakagrutiwn, Venice, 1904, p. 30.118; and A.G.
Abrahamyan,Ananiairakatsumatenagrutyun,Erevan,1944,pp.375.29376.2.

SasanianKingsofPersia

ArtiriSasanean,fifty
apuhyArtrean,seventythree
Nersehiaphean,ten
Ormzdiaphean,four
apuhyOrmzdean,seventythree
Artiriaphean,four
VramiYazkertean,eleven
YazkertiVramean,twentyone
VramiYazkertean,twentytwo
YazkertiVramean,nineteen
PeroziYazkertean,twentyseven
VaariYazkertean,four
ZamaspiPerozay,two
KawatiPerozean,fortyone
XosroviKawatean,fortyseven
OrmzdiXosrovean,twelve
XosrovOrmzdean,thirtyeight

AppendixIII
TwoArmenianInscriptions

Thefollowinginscriptionshavepublishedrecently,withfullArmeniantranscription,bibliographyand
photograph: see T.W. Greenwood, A Corpus of early Medieval Armenian Inscriptions, Dumbarton
OaksPapers,vol.58,2004,pp.2791,atpp.7981andfigs.1and3.

Tekor

Sahak Kamsarakan built this martyrium of Saint Sargis for his intercession and of his whole
familyandwifeandchildrenandlovedonesand

AndthissitewasfoundedbymeansofYohanoftheofficeofkatoikosofArmeniaandYohan
bishopofArarunikandTayronelderofthecommunityofTekorandMananhazarapetofUran
Horom[]

Bagaran

InthethirtyfourthyearofkingXosrov,theblessedLordButArueeansetoutthefoundations
ofthisholychurch.InthethirtyeighthyearGobtiandXumatkilledButandthreeyearsafter
thedeathofBut,AnnaythewifeofButcompletedthisholychurchinthemonthTr,onday20
[] in the office of martspan (= marzpan) of Varaztirots aspet of Armenia, in the lordship of
Vahan Arieean, in the (spiritual) oversight of [] brothers son Ewserk. May God remember
andhavemercyonthedaughtersofGrigorVanandatsi,thehusbandofAanuKamsarakan,
Annay and the little children G[]han, Hrahat and Tiarwand [and] uan, princess of Sahak
sahasi