Translated Texts for Historians Volume 31 The Armenian History attributed to Sebeos translated, with notes, by R. W. THOMSON Historical commentary by JAMES HOWARD-JOHNSTON Assistance from TIM GREENWOOD PART I. TRANSLATION AND NOTES Liverpool University Press T T PREFACE vii TRANSCRIPTION OF ARMENIAN viii ABBREVIATIONS ix INTRODUCTION I. Historical Background [JH-J] xi (i) Armenia in late Antiquity xii (ii) Relations between the Great Powers xv (iii) Late Sixth Century xviii (iv) The Last Great War of Antiquity xxii (v) The Arab Conquests xxvi II. The Armenian Text [RWT] xxxi (i) The Manuscripts xxxi (ii) Contents of the Text v xxxii (iii) The Attribution to Sebeos xxxiii (a) Sebeos the Bishop xxxiv (b) The Text in Later Historians xxxv (c) The'History of Heraclius' xxxvi (iv) The Date of Sebeos'History xxxviii (v) Sebeos in the Tradition of Armenian Historical Writing xl (a) His Predecessors xl (b) Features in Common and Differences xlii (c) The Geographical Sweep xliii (d) The Purpose of Historical Writing xliv (vi) Literary Characteris (a) The Bible xlix (b) The Use of Speeches and Letters Iii (c) Sebeos' Chronology lviii VITABLE OF CONTENTS III. Sebeos as Historian [JH-J] lxi (i) Sources lxv (ii) Editorial Treatment lxx (iii) Value of Sebeos' History lxxiv Note to the Reader lxxix ANNOTATED TRANSLATION [RWT] 1 PART II HISTORICAL COMMENTARY [JH-J] 155 Introduction 155 I. Section I: 64-105 (Notes 1-24) 158 II. Section II: 106-134 (Notes 25-51)193 III. Section III: 134-177 (Notes 52-83) 233 BIBLIOGRAPHY I. Texts 289 II. Secondary Literature 295 INDICES I. Biblical Quotations and Allusions [RWT] 311 II. Technical Terms [TWG] 315 III. Armenian Personal Names by Family [RWT] 333 IV. Personal Names [RWT] 337 V. Geographical Index [RWT] 345 VI. Historical Notes [JH-J] 353 MAPS 357 1. West Asia in the period of Heraclius (610-642) 2. Armenia in the period of Heraclius (610-642) 3. Armenia in the period of Heraclius: the central lands 4. The Near East (topography) 5. Armenia and neighbouring lands (topography) PREFACE The translation of the History attributed to the Armenian Sebeos is a joint undertaking. James Howard-Johnston [JH-J] had been working for some time on the Armenian sources for the history of the first half of the seventh century in the context of Byzantine-Sasanian conflict and the early Muslim conquests. When Robert Thomson [RWT] arrived in Oxford in 1992, we read together parts of the History of Sebeos. In 1994 we were approached by Dr Mary Whitby on behalf of the Editors of Translated Texts for Historians with the suggestion that we prepare an English rendering of the Classical Armenian text for that series. We decided that RWT would prepare a translation of the text with notes on questions of specifically Armenian interest, while JH-J would add a general historical commentary putting this work in the broad context of Near Eastern history of the period. Although the result is a joint product in which the authors have consulted each other regularly, prime responsibility for the English rendering with the accompanying notes lies with RWT. The historical commentary by JH-J is printed separately after the translation, organized by sections rather than by discrete notes to individual points. Our hope is that the reader without knowledge of Armenian will be able to use this evidence in a reasonably reliable fashion, not only placing it within a wider perspective, but also noting at the same time the many problems within the Armenian text as it has come down to us. We are greatly indebted to Timothy Greenwood, not only for correlating the various sections for the final version of the manuscript, but also for the Index of Technical Terms and for many perceptive comments throughout the book's preparation. The Nubar Pasha Fund of the University of Oxford has provided generous support in the preparation of the book. Maps 1-3 have been prepared by Professor R.H. Hewsen, maps 4-5 by JH-J. RWT, JH-J Oxford, September 1998 INTRODUCTION I. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The text traditionally attributed to Sebeos belongs to a very small company of extant chronicles composed in Christendom in the seventh century. It was written at the end of the first phase of the Islamic conquests, when there was a perceptible faltering in the hitherto irresistible advance of Arab forces and hopes rose among Christians that they might awaken from the nightmare, that the triumphs of Islam would turn out to be ephemeral. The task Sebeos set himself was to record the events which had led to these disasters. In a brief preliminary section, he ranged back to the late fifth century, to connect his subject with that covered by his immediate historical predecessor, tazar P'arpets'i. His own principal topic, though, was the reign of the Sasanian king Khosrov II (590-628) or, as he put it, 'the story of the destructive and ruinous Khosrov, cursed by God'. He is described as a brigand who directed the Aryans' raid over the world, 'who consumed with fire the whole inner [land], disturbing the sea and the dry land, to bring destruction on the whole earth'. Sebeos' theme was no narrow one. He did not confine himself to an account of Armenian affairs in difficult times, but rather reached out to cover important contemporary developments in the domestic history and mutual relations of Armenia's two great neighbours, the Persian empire, governed from its re-institution in the early third century AD by the Sasanian dynasty, and the East Roman empire. His perspective was Persian rather than Roman, as is made plain by his own definition of his subject. The reign of the last great Sasanian king formed the framework for his often detailed account of warfare, diplomacy and politics in the core of his history. Armenia was presented implicitly as a component part of a Persian world, which provided noble Armenians with a larger arena where they could achieve real distinction. But there is also a strong dynamic thrust to Sebeos' history as the narrative builds up to the sudden demise of the Sasanian empire and the collapse of the familiar world-order between 635 and 652. He divides these dramatic events into three distinct phases, each of which posed Xll HISTORICAL BACKGROUND different threats to Armenia: first there was a period of close cooperation between the great powers in the 590s which enabled them to apply pressure more effectively than ever before on the Armenian nobility and to extract large fighting forces for service far afield; then Armenia became the main theatre of war in the initial and final phases of the last great conflict between the rival empires (603-630); finally, Armenia felt the force of expanding Islam from as early as 640 and thereafter had at all times to take account of the immense military potential of the Caliphate. Both aspects of Sebeos' principal theme need some introduction. Armenia must be placed in a wider Near Eastern setting and the strength of its ties with Persia should be gauged. Then the late antique world- order, with its two rival imperial poles (Persian and Roman), and the strains to which it was subjected in the fifth and sixth centuries should be outlined, before a summary account is given of the three final phases in the history of the ancient Near East covered by Sebeos. (i) Armenia in Late Antiquity Armenia in antiquity formed the most important component of Transcaucasia.1 Occupying a varied terrain of tangled mountain ranges, sweeping lava flows and rich alluvial plains, the Armenians were a more formidable power than their northern neighbours, the Iberians and the heterogeneous peoples of the Caucasus, and had drawn the Albanians to their east into their cultural orbit. But Transcaucasia as a whole was not, and is not, tidily demarcated from the surrounding world. Physically it acts as a giant causeway linking the two highland power-centres of the Near East, the greater Iranian and the lesser Anatolian plateaux. Of these two neighbouring worlds, it was the eastern, Iran, which could exert influence over Armenia the more easily. In classical antiquity, Armenia with the rest of Transcaucasia was transformed into a large north-western outlier of successive empires centred on the Iranian plateau, the Achaemenid, the Parthian and the Sasanian. For their own security, each of those empires needed to control the Caucasus and the 1 Transcaucasia is a convenient, though modern, designation for the complex world backing onto the Caucasus, comprising, in late antiquity, Abasgia, Lazica, Suania, Iberia, Albania and Armenia. The viewpoint is that of the north, from the steppes which generated formidable nomad powers, more than capable of menacing the peoples living beyond the Caucasus mountains. хш SEBEOS lands backing onto it, and the brute facts of geography which made this imperative also made it possible. The steppe on the Caspian shore is easily reached from Iran proper and itself provides easy access into the deep interior of Transcaucasia, along the open valleys of the Kur and Araxes rivers which arc round the south-eastern redoubt of Armenia (modern Karabakh) and run to distant watersheds in the west. Even the Roman empire in its heyday could only exert a fleeting hegemony beyond those watersheds and had to be content with no more than a quarter of Armenia in the partition agreed with Sasanian Persia in 387. Persian influence had percolated into Armenia over the centuries and can be seen to be pervasive in late antiquity when indigenous sources provide us with a first clear view of Armenian institutions and culture.