IITHE ARMENIANS

It is generally accepted, even by the higher critics, that the present Armenians are descended from Togarmah of the Scriptures (Genesis 10:3). The traditions of the Armenians also happily agree with this. It was common in the olden times for the Armenian writers to call the people “the house of Togarmah,” as did also the prophet Ezekiel (27:14).

There is a happy agreement among the commentators on the subject of “Togarmah” or “the house of Togarmah,” all seeming to accept these words as representing the Armenians. Here we may adduce the statements of a few distinguished writers on this subject. “The third son of Gomer is Togarmah; the people descending from him is called the house of Togarmah—(Ezekiel 27:14)—where they are named after Javan, Tubel, and Meshech, as bringing horses and mules to the mart of Tyre; and 38:6, where it appears after Gomer as a component of the army of Gog. The Armenians regarded Thorgom (Togarmah), the father of Haick, as their ancestor; and even granting that the form of the name Thorgom was occasioned by Thorgama of the LXX(Septuagint version), still the Armenian tradition is confirmed by Tilgarimmu being in the cuneiform inscription the name of a fortified town in the subsequent district of Melitem (Malatiah), on the southwestern boundary of Armenia.”[14]“TOGARMAH.” “The people thus designated are mentioned twice by Ezekiel: in the former passage as trading in the fairs of Tyre with horses and mules, in the latter as about to come with Gomer out of the north quarter against Palestine. Neither passage does much toward fixing a locality, but both agree with the hypothesis which has the support alike of etymology and of national tradition, that the people intended are the ancient inhabitants of Armenia. Grimm’s view that Togarmah is composed of two elements:Taka, which is in Sanskrit ‘tribe’ or ‘race,’ and Armah (Armenia), may well be accepted. The Armenian tradition which derived the Haikian race from Thorgon (m), as it can scarcely be a coincidence, must be regarded as having considerable value. Now, the existing Armenians, the legitimate descendants of those who occupied the country in the time of Ezekiel, speak a language which modern ethnologists pronounce to be decidedly Indo-European; and thus, so far the modern science confirms the Scriptural account.”[15]

This Armenian tradition which the great scholars say “must be regarded as having considerable value,” runs somewhat like the following: About 2300B.C.,Haig, the son of Togarmah, like the rest of the descendants of Noah, was in pursuit of a new home for himself and for his posterity, and had descended with the multitude into the country of Shinar. Here the people, for fear of another destructive flood, attempted to build a high tower, “the tower of Babel.” Haig and his sons distinguished themselves by wisdom and virtue in the erection of this tower; but Belus ambitious for supremacy, yea, even requiring homage to his image, became too repulsive to the virtuous Haig and his sons. Haig, therefore, left the plains of Shinar with his large family and turned back to the home of his nativity, the land of Ararat, in the vicinity of the Lake of Van.

Belus, on hearing that Haig had withdrawn from his authority, pursued him with a large force. Haig, on hearing of the purpose of Belus’ pursuit, mustered all the male members of his family who were able to fight, and all those who were willing to cast their lot with him and willingly put themselves under his authority, and he armed them as best he was able and set out to meet the enemy. He charged his little army to attack that part of the enemy’s force where Belus commanded in person. “For,” said he, “if we succeed in discomfiting that part the victory is ours; should we, however, be unsuccessful in our attempt let us never survive the misery and disgrace of a defeat, but rather perish, sword in hand, defending the best and dearest right of reasonable creatures—our liberty.” Then did the brave leader move on with his little force and encountered theinvaders. After a bloody conflict Belus fell by an arrow discharged at him by Haig. The army of Belus, soon after this, was dispersed. Thus the first battle for liberty the progenitor of the Armenians fought and won for himself and his posterity. The Armenians, therefore, call themselves after this heroHaigsand the countryHaiasdan.

Haig, following the manner of the patriarchs, built many towns and villages and after a long and useful life, died in peace.

Haig was succeeded by his son Armenag—some think Armenia is named after this prince. The son of Armenag, whose name was Aramais, succeeded him. The son and successor of Aramais was Amasia, who, soon after the decease of his father took the lead of the government. According to our tradition it was this king who gave the name Masis, after himself, to that magnificent and huge mountain, now called Mount Ararat. After the death of his father Harmah ascended the throne.

Aram, about 1300B.C.,[16]the son and successor of Harmah, towers among the kings of the first period of the Armenian history; he was, like King David, a great warrior and conqueror. He chased out the Babylonian and Median invaders, penetrated into the heart of Cappadocia, and the countries which he thus subjected to the west of the Euphrates composed the Armenia Minor.

After the long and glorious reign of Aram the country slowly came into a subordinate condition tothe Assyrian empire and though the kings of the Haikian dynasty continued to rule over Armenia, they were according to our traditional history much overshadowed when the southern empire was at the zenith of her glory.

The famous inscription of Tiglath-Pileser I, the king of Assyria (1110-1090B.C.) throws some light on the condition of Armenia, and some of those districts which never knew subjection: “The lands ofLarausandAmmous, which from the days immemorial had not known subjection, like the flood of a deluge I overwhelmed. With their armies on the mountains ofAruma, I fought, and a destruction of them I made.... At the mountain ofAruma, a difficult district which for the passage of my chariots was not suited, I left the chariots, I took the lead of my soldiers.”

It is apparent from the discoveries of the cuneiform inscriptions, both in Armenia and in Assyria, and their decipherment by the modern scholars, that our ancient historians, who depended largely on traditions, were misled or mistaken with regard to the Assyrian supremacy over Armenia at this period—1100-626B.C.Instead of Assyrian supremacy, a new dynasty had sprung up in the regions of Lake Van, north, west, and south of the lake, and become a worthy antagonist of the Assyrians. They had probably pushed the Haikian dynasty further north and northwest for a few centuries.

The following is a brief account of this period and dynasty: It may be interesting and also importantto state that the kings of this dynasty are known to the Assyrian monarchs as the kings of Urartu (Ararat) or Nairi, and in the Assyrian cuneiform inscriptions, they are so named. Neither do they call themselves the kings of Urartu, but they designate themselves as the Kings of Nairi and Biainia.

They call themselves also the children of Khaldis, after their supreme God. Of late the modern writers call them Chaldians or Khaldians, but they are pleased to call themselves the children of Khaldis, and never Khaldians. They seem to have a sort of theocratic reign.

Following is a list of the kings of this dynasty; Arame—He has no inscriptions; he is known only through those of the Assyrian kings, in which he is styled the king of Urartu (Ararat). He was attacked in his capital, Arzaskum, by Shalmaneser II in 860 and again in 856B.C.

1. Sarduris I—Son of Lutipris, was attacked by the general of Shalmaneser II in about 833B.C.Called King of Urartu in the Assyrian inscriptions.

2. Ispuinis—Son of Sarduris, 825-812B.C., mentioned in his own inscriptions, styled himself King of Nairi of Soura (Northern Syria), inhabiting the city of Dhuspas.

3. Menuas—Son of Ispuinis, “may be regarded as the founder of the original garden city of Van.” He calls himself the great King of Biania, inhabiting the city of Dhuspas (Van).

4. Argistis—his son—Numerous inscriptions ofhis are found as far north as Alexandropol—He described his conquests of the Assyrians southeast of Lake Urumia. Lynch thinks “He was the founder of the City of Armanir in the valley of the Araxes.”

5. Sarduris II—Son of Argistis—His numerous inscriptions are scattered over a large area of the country as far as Malatia. He probably reigned from 754-727B.C.He is called the King of Urardhu in the Assyrian inscriptions.

6. Rusas—his son. He has at least two important inscriptions. He came in contact with Sargon, the King of Assyria (722-705B.C.)

7. Argistis II—Son of Rusas. The mention of this ruler in a Vannic text was discovered by Messrs. Beliek and Lehman in an inscription on a shield in the temple at Tobrak Kala, near Van; now in the British Museum.

8. Rusas II—The son of the above. He is mentioned on the shield above mentioned, and also in two new inscriptions found byDr.Belek, in which it is told that he conquered the Hittites and Moschians. He was a contemporary of Esarhaddon of Assyria (681-668B.C.).

9. Erimenas—He is mentioned in an inscription on the shield as the father of Rusas III.

10. Rusas III—He rebuilt the temple of Khaldis (god) on the Tobrak Kala. An inscription of this king has been found at Armauir.

11. Sarduris III—He is known through the Assyrian inscriptions as having sent an embassy an embassy toAshur-Bani-Pal for a treaty of peace, about 644B.C.[17]

The succession of the kings of this dynasty has been recently corrected by inscriptions discovered by Drs. Belek and Lehmann. They put (1) Lutipris, (2) Sarduris I, (3) Arame, (4) Sarduris II.... They suppose a Sarduris II, the son of Arame, as the antagonist of Shalmaneser II, and suggest that Sarduris I was a contemporary of Ashur-Naser-Pal II (885-860B.C.).

“The original capital of the land was named Arzashkun, and was situated in the valley of Araxes. The first kings mentioned in the inscription are Lutipris and Sarduris I, who were contemporary with Ashur-Naser-Pal (885-860B.C.). In the account of the sweeping operations from end to end of the northern regions, which marked the beginning and end of that great warrior’s reign, no mention is made of Sarduris, but it is more than probable that he felt the weight of Ashur-Naser-Pal’s arm. Shalmaneser II is the first Assyrian king who states that he came into actual hostile contact with Urartu, whose king was Arame. In 860, 857, and 845 Shalmaneser ravaged Arame’s country and finally destroyed Arzashkun. Later, when Sarduris II had succeeded Arame, the Assyrianturtan(general) Ashurdayan attacked (in 833 and 829B.C.). Ten years later again theturtanof Shamshi-Adod led an expedition against Ishpuinis, the successor of Sarduris II. These successive attacks seem to have strengthened rather than weakened the hardy mountain state, while the Assyrians gained no real advantage from them. In alliance, apparently, with Urartu, stood the Mannai, an Iranian folk of Median stock,and Protomedes, to whom the name Madai properly belonged (it now first appears in history), in the country east of Lake Urmia.... Meanwhile Menuas, the son of Sarduris II, had extended the dominion of Urartu to the western shores of Lake Urmia. Argistis I, his son, conquered the whole of Kurdistan and Armenia as far west as Meled or Meleten (Malatia). The proximity of the territory of Urartu to the center of the Assyrian power now became directly dangerous to the empire.”[18]

It is more than probable that our esteemed reader’s patience has been taxed beyond measure by reading a history furnished by the Assyrian and Armenian inscriptions, but then hardy states, the kingdoms of Ararat have rendered a noble service to mankind by checking the Assyrian kings from doing more mischief in other parts of western Asia. Not infrequently these kings had to quit in the midst of their campaign in Syria, Palestine or in Asia Minor and run back to stop the avalanche coming down from the “Mountains of Aruma” to sweep the Assyrians down. With all their boasting, the Assyrian kings never conquered the kingdoms of Ararat.

“The great undertaking of the 4th year of the King’s reign was a campaign into the lands of Nairi. By this, the annals of Tiglathpileser I clearly mean the lands about the sources of the Tigris and Euphrates, lying north, west and south of Lake Van.... One only of these twenty-three kings—Pierri, the king of Dayami (near Maleshgert)—refused to surrender as the others did but resisted to the last. He was therefore carried in chains to Assyria.... This episode in theking’s conquests is concluded with the claim that the whole of the lands of Nairi were subdued, but later history shows clearly that further conquest was necessary.”[19]

Tiglathpileser IV, the king of Assyria, made several attempts (in 739, 736, 735B.C.) to reduce the kingdoms of Ararat, but he completely failed to conquer them. The authority above quoted concludes the history of their campaigns in these words: “After some ineffectual fighting about the Capital (Van) Tiglathpileser raised the siege and departed. He had not succeeded in adding the kingdom of Urartu to Assyria.”[20]

According toDr.Belek, the last work of the last king, Sarduris IV, of Ararat is written in the records of Ashurbanipal of Assyria (668-626B.C.). Sarduris sent messengers, with presents and words of friendliness to the Assyrian king. Assyria had abandoned its attempts to wreck the kingdom of Ararat and the two powers now were friends. Some of the modern kings would have saved untold misery and millions of lives had they done likewise.

It is very probable that Aram of the Armenian historians, Aruma of Tiglath-Pileser I (1090B.C.) and Arame of Shalmaneser II (860B.C.) are the same name. Tiglath-Pileser may have used it as a certain district, for his expression would justify this supposition: “On the mountains of Aruma I fought.” And again: “At the mountain of Aruma, a difficultdistrict....”[21]No name of a king is mentioned at this date. But in the time of Shalmaneser’s invasion into Armenia (860B.C.), we are distinctly told: “The inscription of Kurkh (twenty miles from Diarhekir) informs us that Shalmaneser had already, in the year of his accession, come in conflict with Arrame (or Arame, as the name is there written). After leaving the city of Khupuscia, in the land of Nahri, he had attacked Sugunia, a stronghold of Arame, ‘King of Urardlians,’ and there marched to the Sea of the land of Nahri; or Lake Van, where a figure of himself and a cuneiform inscription were engraved on the rack.”[22]

A probable hypothesis is that Aram of the Armenian historians, by his conquests and wise administration, had formed a dynasty, that the early Assyrians knew his country and some of his successors by his name, that Arame of the time of Shalmaneser may have been the last of that dynasty and on account of his reverses with the Assyrian King, his reign came to an end. The following quotation from Professor Sayce seems to confirm this view: “A more serious difficulty exists in the fact that Sarduris I calls himself the son of Lutipris, whereas the king of Uradhu, against whom Shalmaneser had to contend in 857 and 845B.C., was Arame, and already, in 833B.C., only twelve years later, his antagonist was Sarduris. It is, however, quite possible that the reign of Lutipris had been a short one of less thantwelve years. But I am more inclined to conjecture that Sarduris I was the leader of a new dynasty, the ill successes of Arame in his wars with Assyrians forming the occasion for his overthrow.” This conjecture also explains why the kings of this dynasty do not call themselves the kings of Ararat, and have no reference to Arame, while much Assyrianism exists in their culture.

In regard to the origin of Ararat, or Arardhi, it is certainly not a Semitic word, neither is it an Accadian, were it so, we would have been told. Moses of Khorene thought it was called Ara-ard, in reference to a defeat of Ara, the king of Armenia, in a bloody conflict with the Babylonians about eighteen centuries before our era. Another Armenian historian makes Arardhi to derive its name from King Ara, in honor of the king, it being composed of Ara and Ardh, “field” or “plain,” on account of his wise administration and the improvements which he made in the land.[23]

Brockhous’ definition and derivation of Arardhi is the most satisfactory of all, namely, Ar, in Sanskrit the root of “Aryan” or “nobles,” and ardh, in ancient Armenian the “plains” or “field,” thus Arardhi or Ararat meaning “the plains of nobles” or “Aryans.”[24]

The antiquity of the name of Ararat is not disputed. It first comes to our notice in the book of Genesis, as we have seen in connection with theresting of the ark “upon the mountains of Ararat.” The book of Genesis is considered by the best critics to be the oldest book, or at least, having the oldest documents that compose the book in the Scriptures, and its authorship is assigned to Moses, who lived in the fifteenth century before the Christian era. Ararat was known as the name of Armenia even several centuries before the time of Moses. “An ancient bilingual tablet (W. A. I., II 48, 13) makes Urdhu the equivalent oftilla, the latter, as Sir H. Rawlinson long ago pointed out, being probably a semitic loan-word, and meaning “the highlands.”Tilla, the equivalent of Urdhu, usually signifies that land of Accad or northern Babylonia, but since it is not glossed in this passage, and stands, moreover, between Akharu or Palestine, and Kutu Kurdistan, it would seem that it is here employed to denote Armenia. Urardhu, therefore, contracted into Urdhu, would have been the designation of the highlands of Armenia among the Babylonians as early as the sixteenth and seventeenth centuryB.C.”[25]

We know that the Assyrians sprang out of the ancient Babylonian people; they were of the same blood and race. Assyria was colonized from Babylonia.[26]Thus, their early acquaintance with the highlands of Armenia, by the name of Urardhu, accounts for their calling the Kings of Armenia the kings of Urardhu or Ararat.

There has been a great deal of discussion amongthe scholars as to whether these Vaunic kings and people belong to the Aryan race or not, and whether their language belongs to the Indo-European family of languages. The question may be considered still a debatable one, though the consensus of opinion of the modern writers is in the negative. Yet a man like the lateDr.Hincks, who was the first to begin the decipherment of the Vaunic inscriptions, has recorded his opinion in the following words: “I flatter myself, that those who read this paper will admit that I have made a beginning, and gone a considerable way in the decipherment and interpretation of a set of inscriptions, which, however slight may be their value in a historical point of view, are invaluable to the philologer, as being beyond all comparison the oldest specimens of the Asiatic branch of the Indo-Germanic family; nay, for aught we know to the contrary, they are more ancient than any Greek which has come down to us.”[27]

The name Armenia was differently spelled by the ancients. In the old Persian it is written Armina, and in the Armondian, Kharminya. It first appears in the cuneiform inscriptions of Darius Hystospis (522-486B.C.), which supplanted the earlier name Arardu, or Ararat. According to the Armenian historians it is called after King Armenag, but according to others its origin is unknown. “It may be connected with the Vaunic wordarmeini-lio‘a stele’ (monument), or with Arman, an Aramaean district south of Lake Van.”[28]

It must have been during the reign of Rusas II, the King of Ararat, that the sons of Sennacherib, Adrammelech and Shareser, after their assassination of their father, escaped into the land of Ararat or Armenia (see Isaiah 37:37-38). For we know that Rusas II was contemporary of Esar-haddon, Sennacherib’s son, who succeeded him (681-668B.C.). The Armenian history makes Sgaiordi the king who welcomed the Assyrian princes in to his realm: probably it is a mistake.

Ashurbanipal was the last king of Assyria who had anything to do with the Kings of Ararat. As we have seen he made the treaty of peace with Sarduris III or IV, but his long reign (from 668-626B.C.) was a period of gradual waning of the power of the vast empire. Babylon, hitherto a tributary of Assyria, became independent under Nabopolassar about 625B.C., and by the aid of the King of Ararat and their ally, Nabopalassar succeeded in overthrowing the Assyrian empire, and about 607B.C.Nineveh, the Assyrian capital, fell before Nabopolassar and his allies. The supremacy of the East was thus transferred to Babylon.

According to our history, Prince Baruir was an ally of Nabopalassar. It is not said that he was an ally when the latter established the independence of Babylon (though he might have been), but he was an ally when Nabopalassar finished the work of overthrowing the Assyrian empire. Thirty-seven years before the latter event Sarduris was the King of Ararat. There is a great probability that Baruirof the Armenian history and Sarduris of the cuneiform inscription are either the same person, or Baruir is a successor of Sarduris, by the same name; and that the name Baruir is a misspelled form of Sarduris.[29]Again, the son and successor of Baruir (or Sarduris V) is called H’rasha or H’racha. It is surely more than probable that this is the name of Rusas of the inscriptions. I would not insist that he is Rusas III, who lived before Sarduis IV, but if Baruir is identical with Sarduris IV, or he is his successor, then is H’rasha his son and successor Rusas IV. He was a contemporary and an ally of Nebuchadnezzar, who succeeded his father Nabopolassar about 606B.C.

H’racha, as the ally of Nebuchadnezzar, marched at the head of his forces with the Babylonian monarch against Syria and Palestine. On his return, he brought with him a small colony from Judea, mostly nobles,[30]among whom was a prince by the name of Shambat, whose posterity in the middle ages furnished the kings of Pagradit dynasty in Armenia.

Among the successors of H’racha, as the rulers of Armenia, Tigranes I is spoken of, by our historians, as really royal; wise in his administration of the affairs of the State and just in his dealings with the high and low. In the revolt of the Persians, and consequent defeat of Astyages (the Median King) and the Medes; which resulted in the accession of Cyrus to the throne of the united Medo-Persianempire; Tigranes must have rendered some valuable service to the son of Cambyses. This may account for the great friendship that existed between these two worthy champions of human liberty.[31]And according to the summons of Prophet Jeremiah (51:27-28), the forces of Ararat, Minni, and Ashchenaz joined the Medo-Persian army and accomplished the overthrow of the wicked empire of Babylonia (538B.C.).

The descendants of Tigranes I maintained some sort of a tributary rule over the northeastern part of the country, but the major part of the country was ruled by the governors appointed by the Medo-Persian kings. Yet little as this tributary state was, judging by the references found in the Behistan inscriptions, revolts were not infrequent. The following is from Darius Hystaspis’ inscriptions (521-486B.C.).

“... Afterwards I sent Dadarshesh the Armenian, he is my servant, I said to him, ‘go and crush that rebellious army, which revolts against.’ Dadarshesh went to subdue Armenia. The rebels fought against him, Ormazd came to my help. My army destroyed many of the enemy’s army.”

King Vahi was the last of the descendants of Tigranes I, who at the head of his army was fightingwith the Persian forces against the Macedonian invaders under Alexander the Great. King Vahi valiantly fought against the Grecian armies in defense of the rights of his people and country, and in the terrible conflict he fell (330B.C.). From this time on the Macedonian rulers controlled all of Armenia, except a small district between the rivers Araxes and Kur in the remote northeastern mountain fastnesses. After the defeat of Antiochus the Great by the Romans, Armenia recovered her independence; it, however, did not last very long.

On the east and southeast of the Caspian Sea, a mountainous district is marked on the ancient maps of the east—Parthia. It is generally believed by the learned that the people who occupied this country and were called Parthians, were of Scythian origin, and that the word Parthian in the Scythian language meansexile. They were nomadic in their habits, but noted horsemen and well skilled in handling the bow and arrow. They were patient in bearing the yoke under the Assyrian, Median, and Persian governments. After the conquests of Alexander the Great they shared the fate of their more enlightened and powerful neighbors; but even the Parthians could not stand any longer the miserable rule of the successors of the Macedonian king. They revolted against Antiochus II, in 256, and during the reign of Seleucus II, under the leadership of Arsaces, they established their complete independence (238B.C.), and began to extend their dominions into the east, and west, and north and south.Within less than a century, the Arsacide dynasty extended the boundaries of the Parthian empire from the Indus to the Euphrates and from the Caspian Sea to the Persian Gulf.

Arsaces VI, or the Great, appointed his brother Valarsaces king over Armenia (149B.C.), and these two countries, governed by one reigning family, were in full sympathy and accord with each other and for a long time in a firm alliance, becoming worthy antagonists of the Romans, who were pushing eastward over the territories once subdued by Alexander the Great.

Among the successors of Valarsaces of the Arsacide dynasty of Armenia, Tigranes II, or the Great, immortalized himself, not only in the history of Armenia, but also in universal history. He had a long and glorious reign (98-36B.C.). His name was the glory of his people, as it was also a terror to his foes. He extended his dominions from the Caucasian mountains to the Mesopotamian plains and from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean.

“Tigranes (II) had hitherto been continually increasing in strength. By the defeat of Artunes, king of Sopheni or Armenia Minor, he had made himself master of Armenia in its widest extent; by his wars with Parthia herself, he had acquired Gordyene, or Northern Mesopotamia, and Adiabeni or the entire rich tract east of the middle Tigris (including Assyria proper and Arbelitis), as far, at any rate, as the course of the lower Zab; by means which are not stated, he had brought under subjection the king of the important country of Media Atropatene, independent since the time of Alexander.Invited into Syria, aboutB.C.83, by the wretched inhabitants, wearied with perpetual civil wars between the princes of the house of Seleucidae, he had found no difficulty in establishing himself as a king over Cilicia, Syria and most of Phœnicia. AboutB.C.80, he had determined on building himself a new capital in the province of Gordieni, a capital of vast size, provided with all the luxuries required by an Oriental court, and fortified with a wall which recalled the glories of the ancient cities of Assyria.”[32]

This magnificent capital was called after him—Tigranaghert[33](built by Tigranes).

Long before this time the Romans had been following the track of the Macedonian conqueror to snatch the fragments of his broken Eastern empire from his successors. But Tigranes the Great was like a great wall before their fast advance. Now he was dead. Still worse, there was not, as before, that firm alliance between the Parthians and Armenians, which had been the foundation of their stability. Had the Parthian and Armenian monarchs recognized the fact that Rome was a common enemy to both, and kept their alliance firm and unshaken by the intrigues and enticements of the Roman generals, and had encountered the common foe with their united forces, the Roman power would never have been able to make her appearance, or maintain it, in western Asia. However, whether with braveryor treachery (we rather think with a combination of the two), the Romans pushed their way into that country.

Antony, the Roman general, in his expedition into Parthia entered into alliance with Artavasdes, the son and successor of Tigranes II, and he was allowed to attack Media through Armenia. Media was dependent on Parthia, at this time (35B.C.). Ill success compelled him to retreat into Armenia and winter there. Meanwhile, the king of Media, having been provoked by the Parthians, and with the hope of a possible recovery of his country’s independence by the Roman aid, entered into an alliance with the Roman general. Antony, then desiring to reduce Armenia to a vassal state, by enticing Artavasdes to enter into his power, while the Roman legions were stationed at the most important posts in the country which had afforded them such a hospitable shelter during the severe winter, “he (Antony) professed the most friendly feeling towards Artavasdes, even promising an alliance between their families, that prince (Artavasdes), after some hesitation, at length entered into his presence. He was immediately seized and put in chains, and carried off Artavasdes and a rich bounty into Egypt.”[34]

Artavasdes was kept in prison for about two years and afterwards beheaded (30B.C.). According to some his son recovered the country by the aid of the Parthians and was avenged for the wrong done to his father, by massacring all the perfidious Romansfound in the country. Armenia, after this, was for a long time in a perpetual turmoil, between the Romans on one side and the Parthians on the other. Almost a hundred years after the death of Ardashes II (21B.C.-85A.D.), the condition of the country was most deplorable. The internal dissensions among the nobility of the inhabitants, and the contentions of the Romans and Parthians externally, resulting in the clash of arms often between these two powers. Intrigues and assassinations among the princes and notables, fill the country with horror and the people with misery.

A fragment of the great empire of Tigranes II, the northwestern part of Mesopotamia was made a principality, the soldiers and the nobility made Artavasdes’ cousin, Arsham, king, under the protectorate of Rome (33-3B.C.). The king made Edessa his capital. His son and successor was called Abgarus by the Assyrians. He was contemporary with Christ and was the first Christian Prince (3B.C.-35A.D.). In the north Ardashes (III) seems to have a stormy time for a while, but he had a long and useful reign (85-131A.D.). His three sons successively succeeded him (131-193).

FOOTNOTES:[14]Delitzsch, “Commentary on Genesis,” Vol. I, p. 310.[15]Rawlinson, “The Origin of Nations,” p. 183.[16]The dates of this traditional period are uncertain.[17]Lynch, “Armenia,” Vol. II, pp. 71-76.[18]Hall, “The Ancient History of the Near East,” pp. 458-9.[19]Rogers, “History of Babylonia and Assyria,” Vol. II, pp. 171-2.[20]Rogers, “History of Babylonia and Assyria,” Vol. II, pp. 284-5.[21]See p. 41.[22]Sayce, Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. XIV, p. 393.[23]Chamich, “History of Armenia,” p. 22.[24]Brockhous, “Lexico II,” p. 60.[25]Sayce, “Cuneiform Inscriptions of Van,” Journal R.A.S., Vol. XIV, p. 392.[26]Rogers, “History of Babylonia and Assyria,” Vol. I, pp. 455-6[27]Hincks, Journal Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. IX, p. 422.[28]Hastings’ “Dictionary of the Bible,” under the articleArarat.[29]From Sarduris, by droppingdand by the exchange ofBforS, we have Baruris or Baruros, vice versa.[30]See II Kings, 24:11-16. This is the first captivity, about 597B.C.[31]This friendship between Cyrus and Tigranes furnished Xenophon with a fertile subject to expand his romantic genius. “And you, Tigranes,” said he (Cyrus), “at what rate would you purchase the regaining of your wife?” Now he happened to be but lately married and had a very great love for his wife. “Cyrus,” said he (Tigranes), “to save her from servitude, I would ransom her at the expense of my life.”“Cyropædia,” Book III, Chapter I.[32]Rawlinson, “The Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy,” pp. 140-1.[33]According to Strabo, 12 Greek cities were depopulated to furnish Tigrancerta with inhabitants (XI, 14 Sect. 15). According to Appean 300,000 Cappadocians were translated thither (Methrice, page 216 C). Plutarch speaks of the population as having been drawn from Cilicin, Cappadocia, Gordyene, Assyria and Adeabeni (Lucu, 11 26).[34]Rawlinson, “The Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy,” XIII, p. 206.

[14]Delitzsch, “Commentary on Genesis,” Vol. I, p. 310.

[15]Rawlinson, “The Origin of Nations,” p. 183.

[16]The dates of this traditional period are uncertain.

[17]Lynch, “Armenia,” Vol. II, pp. 71-76.

[18]Hall, “The Ancient History of the Near East,” pp. 458-9.

[19]Rogers, “History of Babylonia and Assyria,” Vol. II, pp. 171-2.

[20]Rogers, “History of Babylonia and Assyria,” Vol. II, pp. 284-5.

[21]See p. 41.

[22]Sayce, Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. XIV, p. 393.

[23]Chamich, “History of Armenia,” p. 22.

[24]Brockhous, “Lexico II,” p. 60.

[25]Sayce, “Cuneiform Inscriptions of Van,” Journal R.A.S., Vol. XIV, p. 392.

[26]Rogers, “History of Babylonia and Assyria,” Vol. I, pp. 455-6

[27]Hincks, Journal Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. IX, p. 422.

[28]Hastings’ “Dictionary of the Bible,” under the articleArarat.

[29]From Sarduris, by droppingdand by the exchange ofBforS, we have Baruris or Baruros, vice versa.

[30]See II Kings, 24:11-16. This is the first captivity, about 597B.C.

[31]This friendship between Cyrus and Tigranes furnished Xenophon with a fertile subject to expand his romantic genius. “And you, Tigranes,” said he (Cyrus), “at what rate would you purchase the regaining of your wife?” Now he happened to be but lately married and had a very great love for his wife. “Cyrus,” said he (Tigranes), “to save her from servitude, I would ransom her at the expense of my life.”“Cyropædia,” Book III, Chapter I.

“Cyropædia,” Book III, Chapter I.

[32]Rawlinson, “The Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy,” pp. 140-1.

[33]According to Strabo, 12 Greek cities were depopulated to furnish Tigrancerta with inhabitants (XI, 14 Sect. 15). According to Appean 300,000 Cappadocians were translated thither (Methrice, page 216 C). Plutarch speaks of the population as having been drawn from Cilicin, Cappadocia, Gordyene, Assyria and Adeabeni (Lucu, 11 26).

[34]Rawlinson, “The Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy,” XIII, p. 206.

Back to Index Next