_Internal Troubles on the Death of Isdigerd I. Accession of Varahran V.
His Persecution of the Christians. His War with Rome. His Relations with
Armenia from A.D. 422 to A.D. 428. His Wars with the Scythic Tribes on
his Eastern Frontier. His Strange Death. His Coins. His Character._
It would seem that at the death of Isdigerd there was some difficulty as
to the succession. Varahran, whom he had designated as his heir, appears
to have been absent from the capital at the time; while another son,
Sapor, who had held the Armenian throne from A.D. 414 to 418, was
present at the seat of government, and bent on pushing his claims.
Varahran, if we may believe the Oriental writers, who are here
unanimous, had been educated among the Arab tribes dependent on Persia,
who now occupied the greater portion of Mesopotamia. His training had
made him an Arab rather than a Persian; and he was believed to have
inherited the violence, the pride, and the cruelty of his father. His
countrymen were therefore resolved that they would not allow him to be
king. Neither were they inclined to admit the claims of Sapor, whose
government of Armenia had not been particularly successful, and whose
recent desertion of his proper post for the advancement of his own
private interests was a crime against his country which deserved
punishment rather than reward. Armenia had actually revolted as soon as
he quitted it, had driven out the Persian garrison, and was a prey
to rapine and disorder. We cannot be surprised that, under these
circumstances, Sapor’s machinations and hopes were abruptly terminated,
soon after his father’s demise, by his own murder. The nobles and chief
Magi took affairs into their own hands. Instead of sending for Varahran,
or awaiting his arrival, they selected for king a descendant of
Artaxerxes I. only remotely related to Isdigerd--a prince of the name of
Chosroes--and formally placed him upon the throne. But Varahran was not
willing to cede his rights. Having persuaded the Arabs to embrace his
cause, he marched upon Ctesiphon at the head of a large force, and by
some means or other, most probably by the terror of his arms, prevailed
upon Chosroes, the nobles, and the Magi, to submit to him. The people
readily acquiesced in the change of masters; Chosroes descended into a
private station, and Varahran, son of Isdigerd, became king.
Varahran seems to have ascended the throne in A.D. 420. He at once
threw himself into the hands of the priestly party, and, resuming the
persecution of the Christians which his father had carried on during his
later years, showed himself, to one moiety of his subjects at any
rate, as bloody and cruel as the late monarch. Tortures of various
descriptions were employed; and so grievous was the pressure put upon
the followers of Christ that in a short time large numbers of the
persecuted sect quitted the country, and placed themselves under the
protection of the Romans. Varahran had to consider whether he would
quietly allow the escape of these criminals, or would seek to enforce
his will upon them at the risk of a rupture with Rome. He preferred the
bolder line of conduct. His ambassadors were instructed to require
the surrender of the refugees at the court of Constantinople; and when
Theodosius, to his honor, indignantly rejected the demand, they had
orders to protest against the emperor’s decision, and to threaten him
with their master’s vengeance.
It happened that at the time there were some other outstanding disputes,
which caused the relations of the two empires to be less amicable than
was to be desired. The Persians had recently begun to work their gold
mines, and had hired experienced persons from the Romans, whose services
they found so valuable that when the period of the hiring was expired
they would not suffer the miners to quit Persia and return to their
homes. They are also said to have ill-used the Roman merchants who
traded in the Persian territories, and to have actually robbed them of
their merchandise.
These causes of complaint were not, however, it would seem, brought
forward by the Romans, who contented themselves with simply refusing
the demand for the extradition of the Christian fugitives, and
refrained from making any counter-claims. But their moderation was not
appreciated; and the Persian monarch, on learning that Rome would
not restore the refugees, declared the peace to be at an end, and
immediately made preparations for war. The Romans had, however,
anticipated his decision, and took the field in force before the
Persians were ready. The command was entrusted to a general bearing the
strange name of Ardaburius, who marched his troops through Armenia into
the fertile province of Arzanene, and there defeated Narses, the leader
whom Varahran had sent against him. Proceeding to plunder Arzanene,
Ardaburius suddenly heard that his adversary was about to enter the
Roman province of Mesopotamia, which was denuded of troops, and seemed
to invite attack. Hastily concluding his raid, he passed from Arzanene
into the threatened district, and was in time to prevent the invasion
intended by Narses, who, when he found his designs forestalled, threw
himself into the fortress of Nisibis, and there stood on the defensive.
Ardaburius did not feel himself strong enough to invest the town; and
for some time the two adversaries remained inactive, each watching the
other. It was during this interval that (if we may credit Socrates) the
Persian general sent a challenge to the Roman, inviting him to fix time
and place for a trial of strength between the two armies. Ardaburius
prudently declined the overture, remarking that the Romans were not
accustomed to fight battles when their enemies wished, but when it
suited themselves. Soon afterwards he found himself able to illustrate
his meaning by his actions. Having carefully abstained from attacking
Nisibis while his strength seemed to him insufficient, he suddenly, upon
receiving large reinforcements from Theodosius, changed his tactics,
and, invading Persian Mesopotamia, marched upon the stronghold held by
Narses, and formally commenced its siege.
Hitherto Varahran, confident in his troops or his good fortune, had left
the entire conduct of the military operations to his general; but
the danger of Nisibis--that dearly won and highly prized
possession--seriously alarmed him, and made him resolve to take the
field in person with all his forces. Enlisting on his side the services
of his friends the Arabs, under their great sheikh, Al-Amundarus
(Moundsir), and collecting together a strong body of elephants, he
advanced to the relief of the beleaguered town. Ardaburius drew off on
his approach, burned his siege artillery, and retired from before the
place. Nisibis was preserved; but soon afterwards a disaster is said to
have befallen the Arabs, who, believing themselves about to be attacked
by the Roman force, were seized with a sudden panic, and, rushing in
headlong flight to the Euphrates (!) threw themselves into its waters,
encumbered with their clothes and arms, and there perished to the number
of a hundred thousand.
The remaining circumstances of the war are not related by our
authorities in chronological sequence. But as it is certain that the war
lasted only two years, and as the events above narrated certainly belong
to the earlier portion of it, and seem sufficient for one campaign, we
may perhaps be justified in assigning to the second year, A.D. 421, the
other details recorded--viz., the siege of Theodosiopolis, the combat
between Areobindus and Ardazanes, the second victory of Ardaburius, and
the destruction of the remnant of the Arabs by Vitianus.
Theodosiopolis was a city built by the reigning emperor, Theodosius II.,
in the Roman portion of Armenia, near the sources of the Euphrates.
It was defended by strong walls, lofty towers, and a deep ditch. Hidden
channels conducted an unfailing supply of water into the heart of the
place, and the public granaries were large and generally well stocked
with provisions. This town, recently built for the defence of the Roman
Armenia, was (it would seem) attacked in A.D. 421 by Varahran in person.
He besieged it for above thirty days, and employed against it all the
means of capture which were known to the military art of the period.
But the defence was ably conducted by the bishop of the city, a certain
Eunomius, who was resolved that, if he could prevent it, an infidel
and persecuting monarch should never lord it over his see. Eunomius not
merely animated the defenders, but took part personally in the defence,
and even on one occasion discharged a stone from a balista with his own
hand, and killed a prince who had not confined himself to his military
duties, but had insulted the faith of the besieged. The death of this
officer is said to have induced Varahran to retire, and not further
molest Theodosiopolis.
While the fortified towns on either side thus maintained themselves
against the attacks made on them, Theodosius, we are told, gave an
independent command to the patrician Procopius, and sent him at the head
of a body of troops to oppose Varahran. The armies met, and were on the
point of engaging when the Persian monarch made a proposition to decide
the war, not by a general battle, but by a single combat. Procopius
assented; and a warrior was selected on either side, the Persians
choosing for their champion a certain Ardazanes, and the Romans
“Areobindus the Goth,” count of the “Foederati.” In the conflict which
followed the Persian charged his adversary with his spear, but the
nimble Goth avoided the thrust by leaning to one side, after which he
entangled Ardazanes in a net, and then despatched him with his sword.
The result was accepted by Varahran as decisive of the war, and he
desisted, from any further hostilities. Areobindus received the thanks
of the emperor for his victory, and twelve years later was rewarded with
the consulship.
But meanwhile, in other portions of the wide field over which the war
was raging, Rome had obtained additional successes. Ardaburius, who
probably still commanded in Mesopotamia, had drawn the Persian force
opposed to him into an ambuscade, and had destroyed it, together with
its seven generals. Vitianus, an officer of whom nothing more is known,
had exterminated the remnant of the Arabs not drowned in the Euphrates.
The war had gone everywhere against the Persians; and it is not
improbable that Varahran, before the close of A.D. 421, proposed terms
of peace.
Peace, however, was not exactly made till the next year. Early in A.D.
422, a Roman envoy, by name Maximus, appeared in the camp of Varahran,
and, when taken into the presence of the great king, stated that he was
empowered by the Roman generals to enter into negotiations, but had had
no communication with the Roman emperor, who dwelt so far off that he
had not heard of the war, and was so powerful that, if he knew of it,
he would regard it as a matter of small account. It is not likely that
Varahran was much impressed by these falsehoods; but he was tired of
the war; he had found that Rome could hold her own, and that he was not
likely to gain anything by prolonging it; and he was in difficulties as
to provisions, whereof his supply had run short. He was therefore well
inclined to entertain Maximus’s proposals favorably. The corps of the
“Immortals,” however, which was in his camp, took a different view, and
entreated to be allowed an opportunity of attacking the Romans unawares,
while they believed negotiations to be going on, considering that under
such circumstances they would be certain of victory. Varahran, according
to the Roman writer who is here our sole authority, consented. The
Immortals made their attack, and the Romans were at first in some
danger; but the unexpected arrival of a reinforcement saved them, and
the Immortals were defeated and cut off to a man. After this, Varahran
made peace with Rome through the instrumentality of Maximus, consenting,
it would seem, not merely that Rome should harbor the Persian
Christians, if she pleased, but also that all persecution of Christians
should henceforth cease throughout his own empire.
The formal conclusion of peace was accompanied, and perhaps helped
forward, by the well-judging charity of an admirable prelate. Acacius,
bishop of Amida, pitying the condition of the Persian prisoners whom the
Romans had captured during their raid into Arzanene, and were dragging
off into slavery, interposed to save them; and, employing for the
purpose all the gold and silver plate that he could find in the churches
of his diocese, ransomed as many as seven thousand captives, supplied
their immediate wants with the utmost tenderness, and sent them to
Varahran, who can scarcely have failed to be impressed by an act so
unusual in ancient times. Our sceptical historian remarks, with more
apparent sincerity than usual, that this act was calculated “to
inform, the Persian king of the true spirit of the religion which he
persecuted,” and that the name of the doer might well “have dignified
the saintly calendar.” These remarks are just; and it is certainly to
be regretted that, among the many unknown or doubtful names of canonized
Christians to which the Church has given her sanction, there is no
mention made of Acacius of Amida.
Varahran was perhaps the more disposed to conclude his war with Rome
from the troubled condition of his own portion of Armenia, which
imperatively required his attention. Since the withdrawal from that
region of his brother Sapor in A.D. 418 or 419, the country had had no
king. It had fallen into a state of complete anarchy and wretchedness;
no taxes were collected; the roads were not safe; the strong robbed and
oppressed the weak at their pleasure. Isaac, the Armenian patriarch,
and the other bishops, had quitted their sees and taken refuge in Roman
Armenia, where they were received favorably by the prefect of the East,
Anatolius, who no doubt hoped by their aid to win over to his master the
Persian division of the country. Varahran’s attack on Theodosiopolis
had been a counter movement, and had been designed to make the Romans
tremble for their own possessions, and throw them back on the defensive.
But the attack had failed; and on its failure the complete loss of
Armenia probably seemed imminent. Varahran therefore hastened to make
peace with Rome, and, having so done, proceeded to give his attention
to Armenia, with the view of placing matters there on a satisfactory
footing. Convinced that he could not retain Armenia unless with the
good-will of the nobles, and believing them to be deeply attached to the
royal stock of the Arsacids, he brought forward a prince of that noble
house, named Artases, a son of Varahran-Sapor, and, investing him
with the ensigns of royalty, made him take the illustrious name of
Artaxerxes, and delivered into his hands the entire government of the
country. These proceedings are assigned to the year A.D. 422, the year
of the peace with Rome, and must have followed very shortly after the
signature of the treaty.
It might have been expected that this arrangement would have satisfied
the nobles of Armenia, and have given that unhappy country a prolonged
period of repose. But the personal character of Artaxerxes was,
unfortunately, bad; the Armenian nobles were, perhaps, capricious; and
after a trial of six years it was resolved that the rule of the Arsacid
monarch could not be endured, and that Varahran should be requested
to make Armenia a province of his empire, and to place it under the
government of a Persian satrap. The movement was resisted with all his
force by Isaac, the patriarch, who admitted the profligacy of Artaxerxes
and deplored it, but held that the role of a Christian, however lax he
might be, was to be preferred to that of a heathen, however virtuous.
The nobles, however, were determined; and the opposition of Isaac had
no other result than to involve him in the fall of his sovereign. Appeal
was made to the Persian king and Varahran, in solemn state, heard the
charges made against Artaxerxes by his subjects, and listened to
his reply to them. At the end he gave his decision. Artaxerxes was
pronounced to have forfeited his crown, and was deposed; his property
was confiscated, and his person committed to safe custody. The monarchy
was declared to be at an end; and Persarmenia was delivered into the
hands of a Persian governor. The patriarch Isaac was at the same time
degraded from his office and detained in Persia as a prisoner. It was
not till some years later that he was released, allowed to return
into Armenia, and to resume, under certain restrictions, his episcopal
functions.
The remaining circumstances of the reign of Varahran V. come to us
wholly through the Oriental writers, amid whose exaggerations and fables
it is very difficult to discern the truth. There can, however, be little
doubt that it was during the reign of this prince that those terrible
struggles commenced between the Persians and their neighbors upon the
north-east which continued, from the early part of the fifth till the
middle of the sixth century, to endanger the very existence of the
empire. Various names are given to the people with whom Persia waged
her wars during this period. They are called Turks, Huns, sometimes even
Chinese, but these terms seem, to be used in a vague way, as “Scythian”
was by the ancients; and the special ethnic designation of the people
appears to be quite a different name from any of them. It is a name
the Persian form of which is _Haithal_ or _Haiathleh_, the Armenian
Hephthagh, and the Greek “Ephthalites,” or sometimes “Nephthalites.”
Different conjectures have been formed as to its origin: but none of
them can be regarded as more than an ingenious theory. All that we know
of the Ephthalites is, that they were established in force, during
the fifth and sixth centuries of our era, in the regions east of the
Caspian, especially in those beyond the Oxus river, and that they
were generally regarded as belonging to the Scythic or Finno-Turkic
population, which, at any rate from B.C. 200, had become powerful in
that region. They were called “White Huns” by some of the Greeks; but
it is admitted that they were quite distinct from the Huns who invaded
Europe under Attila; and it may be doubted whether the term “Hun” is
more appropriate to them than that of Turk or even of Chinese. The
description of their physical character and habits left us by Procopius,
who wrote when they were at the height of their power, is decidedly
adverse to the view that they were really Huns. They were a
light-complexioned race, whereas the Huns were decidedly swart; they
were not ill-looking, whereas the Huns were hideous; they were an
agricultural people, while the Huns were nomads; they had good laws, and
were tolerably well civilized, but the Huns were savages. It is probable
that they belonged to the Thibetic or Turkish stock, which has always
been in advance of the Finnic, and has shown a greater aptitude for
political organization and social progress.
We are told that the war of Varahran V. with this people commenced with
an invasion of his kingdom by their Khacan, or Kahn, who crossed the
Oxus with an army of 35,000 (or, according to others, of 250,000) men,
and carried fire and sword into some of the most fertile provinces of
Persia. The rich oasis, known as Meru or Merv, the ancient Margiana, is
especially mentioned as overrun by his troops, which are said by some
to have crossed the Elburz range into Khorassan and to have proceeded
westward as far as Kei, or Rhages. When news of the invasion reached
the Persian court, the alarm felt was great; Varahran was pressed
to assemble his forces at once and encounter the unknown enemy; he,
however, professed complete indifference, said that the Almighty would
preserve the empire, and that, for his own part, he was going to hunt in
Azerbijan, or Media Atropatene. During his absence the government could
be conducted by Narses, his brother. All Persia was now thrown into
consternation; Varahran was believed to have lost his senses; and it was
thought that the only prudent course was to despatch an embassy to
the Khacan, and make an arrangement with him by which Persia should
acknowledge his suzerainty and consent to pay him a tribute. Ambassadors
accordingly were sent; and the invaders, satisfied with the offer of
submission, remained in the position which they had taken up, waiting
for the tribute, and keeping slack guard, since they considered that
they had nothing to fear. Varahran, however, was all the while preparing
to fall upon them unawares. He had started for Azerbijan with a small
body of picked warriors; he had drawn some further strength from
Armenia; he proceeded along the mountain line through Taberistan,
Hyrcania, and Nissa (Nishapur), marching only by night, and carefully
masking his movements. In this way he reached the neighborhood of Merv
unobserved. He then planned and executed a night attack on the invading
army which was completely successful. Attacking his adversaries suddenly
and in the dark--alarming them, moreover, with strange noises, and at
the same time assaulting them with the utmost vigor--he put to flight
the entire Tatar army. The Khan himself was killed; and the flying host
was pursued to the banks of the Oxus. The whole of the camp equipage
fell into the hands of the victors; and Khatoun, the wife of the great
Khan, was taken. The plunder was of enormous value, and comprised
the royal crown with its rich setting of pearls. After this success,
Varahran, to complete his victory, sent one of his generals across the
Oxus at the head of a large force, and falling upon the Tatars in their
own country defeated them a second time with great slaughter. The
enemy then prayed for peace, which was granted them by the victorious
Varahran, who at the same time erected a column to mark the boundary of
his empire in this quarter, and, appointing his brother Narses governor
of Khorassan, ordered him to fix his residence at Balkh, and to prevent
the Tatars from making incursions across the Oxus. It appears that
these precautions were successful, for we hear nothing of any further
hostilities in this quarter during the remainder of Varahran’s reign.
The adventures of Varahran in India, and the enlargement of his
dominions in that direction by the act of the Indian king, who is said
so have voluntarily ceded to him Mekran and Scinde in return for his
services against the Emperor of China, cannot be regarded as historical.
Scarcely more so is the story that Persia had no musicians in his day,
for which reason he applied to the Indian monarch, and obtained from him
twelve thousand performers, who became the ancestors of the Lurs. After
a reign which is variously estimated at nineteen, twenty, twenty-one,
and twenty-three years, Varahran died by a death which would have
been thought incredible, had not a repetition of the disaster, on
the traditional site, been witnessed by an English traveller in
comparatively recent times. The Persian writers state that Varahran was
engaged in the hunt of the wild ass, when his horse came suddenly upon
a deep pool, or spring of water, and either plunged into it or threw his
rider into it, with the result that Varahran sank and never reappeared.
The supposed scene of the incident is a valley between Ispahan and
Shiraz. Here, in 1810, an English soldier lost his life through bathing
in the spring traditionally declared to be that which proved fatal to
Varahran. The coincidence has caused the general acceptance of a tale
which would probably have been otherwise regarded as altogether romantic
and mythical.
The coins of Varahran V. are chiefly remarkable for their rude and
coarse workmanship and for the number of the mints from which they were
issued. The mint-marks include Ctesiphon, Ecbatana, Isaphan, Arbela,
Ledan, Nehavend, Assyria, Chuzistan, Media, and Kerman, or Carmania. The
ordinary legend is, upon the obverse, _Mazdisn bag Varahran malha,_
or _Mazdisn bag Varahran rasti malha,_ and on the reverse, “Yavahran,”
together with a mint-mark. The head-dress has the mural crown in front
and behind, but interposes between these two detached fragments a
crescent and a circle, emblems, no doubt, of the sun and moon gods. The
reverse shows the usual fire-altar, with guards, or attendants, watching
it. The king’s head appears in the flame upon the altar. (PLATE XXI.
Fig. 2).
According to the Oriental writers, Varahran V. was one of the best
of the Sassanian princes. He carefully administered justice among his
numerous subjects, remitted arrears of taxation, gave pensions to men of
science and letters, encouraged agriculture, and was extremely liberal
in the relief of poverty and distress. His faults were, that he was
over-generous and over-fond of amusements, especially of the chase. The
nickname of “Bahram-Gur,” by which he is known to the Orientals, marks
this last-named predilection, transferring to him, as it does, the name
of the animal which was the especial object of his pursuit. But he was
almost equally fond of dancing and of games. Still it does not appear
that his inclination for amusements rendered him neglectful of public
affairs, or at all interfered with his administration of the State.
Persia is said to have been in a most flourishing condition during his
reign. He may not have gained all the successes that are ascribed to
him; but he was undoubtedly an active prince, brave, energetic, and
clear-sighted. He judiciously brought the Roman war to a close when
a new and formidable enemy appeared on his north-eastern frontier; he
wisely got rid of the Armenian difficulty, which had been a stumbling
block in the way of his predecessors for two hundred years; he inflicted
a check on the aggressive Tatars, which indisposed them to renew
hostilities with Persia for a quarter of a century. It would seem that
he did not much appreciate art but he encouraged learning, and did his
best to advance science.