_Right of Succession disputed between the two Sons of Isdigerd II.,
Perozes (or Firuz) and Hormisdas. Civil War for two years. Success of
Perozes, through aid given him by the Ephthalites. Great Famine. Perozes
declares War against the Ephthalites, and makes an Expedition into their
Country. His ill success. Conditions of Peace granted him. Armenian
Revolt and War. Perozes, after some years, resumes the Ephthalite War.
His attack fails, and he is slain in battle. Summary of his Character.
Coins of Hormisdas III. and Perozes. Vase of Perozes._
On the death of Isdigerd II. (A.D. 457) the throne was seized by his
younger son Hormisdas, who appears to have owed his elevation, in a
great measure, to the partiality of his father. That monarch, preferring
his younger son above his elder, had made the latter governor of the
distant Seistan, and had thus removed him far from the court, while he
retained Hormisdas about his own person. The advantage thus secured to
Hormisdas enabled him when his father died to make himself king; and
Perozes was forced, we are told, to fly the country, and place himself
under the protection of the Ephthalite monarch, who ruled in the valley
of the Oxus, over Bactria, Tokaristan, Badakshan, and other neighboring
districts. This king, who bore the name of Khush-newaz, received him
favorably, and though at first, out of fear for the power of Persia, he
declined to lend him troops, was induced after a while to adopt a bolder
policy. Hormisdas, despite his epithet of Ferzan, “the Wise,” was soon
at variance with his subjects, many of whom gathered about Perozes
at the court which he was allowed to maintain in Taleqan, one of
the Ephthalite cities. Supported by this body of refugees, and by an
Ephthalite contingent, Perozes ventured to advance against his brother.
His army, which was commanded by a certain Raham, or Ram, a noble of the
Mihran family, attacked the forces of Hormisdas, defeated them, and
made Hormisdas himself a prisoner. The troops of the defeated monarch,
convinced by the logic of success, deserted their late leader’s cause,
and went over in a body to the conqueror. Perozes, after somewhat more
than two years of exile, was acknowledged as king by the whole Persian
people, and, quitting Taleqan, established himself at Ctesiphon, or
Al Modain, which had now become the main seat of government. It is
uncertain what became of Hormisdas. According to the Armenian writers,
Raham, after defeating him, caused him to be put to death; but the
native historian, Mirkhond, declares that, on the contrary, Perozes
forgave him for having disputed the succession, and amiably spared his
life.
The civil war between the two brothers, short as it was, had lasted long
enough to cost Persia a province. Vatche, king of Aghouank (Albania)
took advantage of the time of disturbance to throw off his allegiance,
and succeeded in making himself independent. It was the first object
of Perozes, after establishing himself upon the throne, to recover this
valuable territory. He therefore made war upon Vatche, thought that
prince was the son of his sister, and with the help of his Ephthalite
allies, and of a body of Alans whom he took into his service, defeated
the rebellious Albanians and completely subjugated the revolted country.
A time of prosperity now ensued. Perozes ruled with moderation and
justice. He dismissed his Ephthalite allies with presents that amply
contented them, and lived for five years in great peace and honor. But
in the seventh year, from the death of his father, the prosperity of
Persia was suddenly and grievously interrupted by a terrible drought,
a calamity whereto Asia has in all ages been subject, and which often
produces the most frightful consequences. The crops fail; the earth
becomes parched and burnt up; smiling districts are change into
wildernesses; fountains and brooks cease to flow; then the wells have no
water; finally even the great rivers are reduced to threads, and contain
only the scantiest supply of the life-giving fluid in their channels.
Famine under these circumstances of necessity sets in; the poor die by
hundreds; even the rich have a difficulty in sustaining life by means of
food imported from a distance. We are told that the drought in the reign
of Perozes was such that at last there was not a drop of water either in
the Tigris or the Oxus; all the sources and fountains, all the streams
and brooks failed; vegetation altogether ceased; the beasts of the field
and the fowls of the air perished; nowhere through the whole empire
was a bird to be seen; the wild animals, even the reptiles, disappeared
altogether. The dreadful calamity lasted for seven years, and under
ordinary circumstances the bulk of the population would have been
swept off; but such were the “wisdom and the beneficence of the Persian
monarch,” that during the entire duration of the scourge not a single
person, or, according to another account, but one person, perished of
hunger. Perozes began by issuing general orders that the rich should
come to the relief of their poorer brethren; he required the governors
of towns, and the head-men of villages, to see that food was supplied
to those in need, and threatened that for each poor man in a town or
village who died of want he would put a rich man to death. At the end of
two years, finding that the drought continued, he declined to take any
revenue from his subjects, remitting taxes of all kinds, whether they
were money imposts or contributions in kind. In the fourth year, not
content with these measures, he went further: opened the treasury doors
and made distributions of money from his own stores to those in need. At
the same time he imported corn from Greece, from India, from the valley
of the Oxus, and from Abyssinia, obtaining by these means such ample
supplies that he was able to furnish an adequate sustenance to all his
subjects. The result was that not only did the famine cause no mortality
among the poorer classes, but no one was even driven to quit the country
in order to escape the pressure of the calamity.
Such is the account which is given by the Oriental authors of the
terrible famine which they ascribe to the early part of the reign of
Perozes. It is difficult, however, to suppose that the matter has not
been very much exaggerated, since we find that, as early as A.D. 464-5,
when the famine should have been at its height, Perozes had entered upon
a great war and was hotly engaged in it, his ambassadors at the same
time being sent to the Greek court, not to ask supplies of food, but to
request a subsidy on account of his military operations. The enemy which
had provoked his hostility was the powerful nation of the Ephthalites,
by whose aid he had so recently obtained the Persian crown. According to
a contemporary Greek authority, more worthy of trust than most writers
of his age and nation, the origin of the war was a refusal on the part
of the Ephthalites to make certain customary payments which the Persians
viewed in the light of a tribute. Perozes determined to enforce his just
rights, and marched his troops against the defaulters with this object.
But in his first operations he was unsuccessful, and after a time he
thought it best to conclude the war, and content himself with taking a
secret revenge upon his enemy, by means of an occult insult. He proposed
to Khush-newaz to conclude a treaty of peace, and to strengthen the
compact by adding to it a matrimonial alliance. Khush-newaz should take
to wife one of his daughters, and thus unite the interests of the two
reigning families. The proposal was accepted by the Ephthalite monarch;
and he readily espoused the young lady who was sent to his court
apparelled as became a daughter of Persia. In a little time, however, he
found that he had been tricked: Perozes had not sent him his daughter,
but one of his female slaves; and the royal race of the Ephthalite
kings had been disgraced by a matrimonial union with a person of
servile condition. Khush-newaz was justly indignant; but dissembled his
feelings, and resolved to repay guile with guile. He wrote to Perozes
that it was his intention to make war upon a neighboring tribe, and that
he wanted officers of experience to conduct the military operations. The
Persian monarch, suspecting nothing, complied with the request, and
sent three hundred of his chief officers to Khush-newaz, who immediately
seized them, put some to death, and, mutilating the remainder, commanded
them to return to their sovereign, and inform him that the king of the
Ephthalites now felt that he had sufficiently avenged the trick of which
he had been the victim. On receiving this message Perozes renewed
the war, advanced towards the Ephthalite country, and fixed his
head-quarters in Hyrcania, at the city of Gurgan, He was accompanied by
a Greek of the name of Eusebius, an ambassador from the Emperor Zeno,
who took back to Constantinople the following account of the campaign.
When Perozes, having invaded the Ephthalite territory, fell in with the
army of the enemy, the latter pretended to be seized with a panic, and
at once took to flight. The retreat was directed upon a portion of the
mountain region, where a broad and good road led into a spacious
plain, surrounded on all sides by wooded hills, steep and in places
precipitous. Here the mass of the Ephthalite troops was cunningly
concealed amid the foliage of the woods, while a small number,
remaining visible, led the Persians into the cul-de-sac, the whole army
unsuspectingly entering, and only learning their danger when they saw
the road whereby they had entered blocked up by the troops from the
hills. The officers then apprehended the true state of the case, and
perceived that they had been cleverly entrapped; but none of them, it
would seem, dared to inform the monarch that he had been deceived by
a stratagem. Application was made to Eusebius, whose ambassadorial
character would protect him from an outbreak, and he was requested to
let Perozes know how he was situated, and exhort him to endeavor to
extricate himself by counsel rather than by a desperate act. Eusebius
upon this employed the Oriental method of apologue, relating to Perozes
how a lion in pursuit of a goat got himself into difficulties, from
which all his strength could not enable him to make his escape. Perozes
apprehended his meaning, understood the situation, and, desisting from
the pursuit, prepared to give battle where he stood. But the Ephthalite
monarch had no wish to push matters to extremities. Instead of falling
on the Persians from every side, he sent an embassy to Perozes and
offered to release him from his perilous situation, and allow him to
return with all his troops to Persia, if he would swear a perpetual
peace with the Ephthalites and do homage to himself as his lord and
master, by prostration. Perozes felt that he had no choice but to accept
these terms, hard as he might think them. Instructed by the Magi, he
made the required prostration at the moment of sunrise, with his face
turned to the east, and thought thus to escape the humiliation of
abasing himself before a mortal by the mental reservation that the
intention of his act was to adore the great Persian divinity. He then
swore to the peace, and was allowed to return with his army intact into
Persia.
It seems to have been soon after the conclusion of his disgraceful
treaty that serious troubles once more broke out in Armenia. Perozes,
following out the policy of his father, Isdigerd, incessantly persecuted
the Christians of his northern provinces, especially those of Armenia,
Georgia, and Albania. So severe were his measures that vast numbers of
the Armenians quitted their country, and, placing themselves under the
protection of the Greek Emperor, became his subjects, and entered into
his service. Armenia was governed by Persian officials, and by apostate
natives who treated their Christian fellow-countrymen with extreme
rudeness, insolence, and injustice. Their efforts were especially
directed against the few noble families who still clung to the faith
of Christ, and had not chosen to expatriate themselves. Among these the
most important was that of the Mamigonians, long celebrated in Armenian
history, and at this time reckoned chief among the nobility. The
renegades sought to discredit this family with the Persians; and Vahan,
son of Hemaiiag, its head, found himself compelled to visit, once and
again, the court of Persia, in order to meet the charges of his enemies
and counteract the effect of their calumnies. Successful in vindicating
himself, and received into high favor by Perozes, he allowed the
sunshine of prosperity to extort from him what he had guarded firmly
against all the blasts of persecution--to please his sovereign, he
formally abjured the Christian faith, and professed himself a disciple
of Zoroaster. The triumph of the anti-Christian party seemed now
secured; but exactly at this point a reaction set in. Vahan became a
prey to remorse, returned secretly to his old creed and longed for an
opportunity of wiping out the shame of his apostasy by perilling his
life for the Christian cause. The opportunity was not long in presenting
itself. In A.D. 481 Perozes suffered a defeat at the hand of the
barbarous Koushans, who held at this time the low Caspian tract
extending from Asterabad to Derbend. Iberia at once revolted, slew its
Zoroastrian king, Vazken, and placed a Christian, Vakhtang, upon the
throne. The Persian governor of Armenia, having received orders to quell
the Iberian rebellion, marched with all the troops that he could muster
into the northern province, and left the Armenians free to follow their
own devices. A rising immediately took place. Vahan at first endeavored
to check the movement, being doubtful of the power of Armenia to cope
with Persia, and feeling sure that the aid of the Greek emperor could
not be counted on. But the the popular enthusiasm overleaped all
resistance; everywhere the Christian party rushed to arms, and swore
to free itself; the Persians with their adherents fled the country;
Artaxata, the capital, was besieged and taken; the Christians were
completely victorious, and, having made themselves masters of all
Persarmenia, proceeded to establish a national government, placing at
their head as king, Sahag, the Bagratide, and appointing Vahan, the
Mamigonian, to be Sparapet, or “Commander-in-Chief.”
Intelligence of these events recalled the Persian governor,
Ader-Veshnasp, from Iberia. Returning into his province at the head
of an army of no great size, composed of Atropatenians, Medes, and
Cadusians, he was encountered by Vasag, a brother of Vahan, on the river
Araxes, with a small force, and was completely defeated and slain.
Thus ended the campaign of A.D. 481. In A.D. 482 the Persians made a
vigorous attempt to recover their lost ground by sending two armies,
one under Ader-Nerseh against Armenia, and the other under Mihran into
Iberia. Vahan met the army of Ader-Nerseh in the plain of Ardaz, engaged
it, and defeated it after a sharp struggle, in which the king, Sahag,
particularly distinguished himself. Mihran was opposed by Vakhtang,
the Iberian king, who, however, soon found himself overmatched, and was
forced to apply to Armenia for assistance. The Armenians came to his aid
in full force; but their generosity was ill rewarded. Vakhtang plotted
to make his peace with Persia by treacherously betraying his allies into
their enemies’ hands; and the Armenians, forced to fight at tremendous
disadvantage, suffered a severe defeat. Sahag, the king, and Vasag, one
of the brothers of Vahan, were slain; Vahan himself escaped, but at the
head of only a few followers, with whom he fled to the highland district
of Daik, on the borders of Home and Iberia. Here he was “hunted upon
the mountains” by Mihran, and would probably have been forced to succumb
before the year was out, had not the Persian general suddenly received
a summons from his sovereign, who needed his aid against the Roushans
of the low Caspian region. Mihran, compelled to obey this call, had to
evacuate Armenia, and Vahan in a few weeks recovered possession of the
whole country.
The year A.D. 483 now arrived, and another desperate attempt was made
to crush the Armenian revolt. Early in the spring a Persian army invaded
Armenia, under a general called Hazaravougd. Vahan allowed himself to be
surprised, to be shut up in the city of Dovin, and to be there besieged.
After a while he made his escape, and renewed the guerilla warfare in
which he was an adept; but the Persians recovered most of the country,
and he was himself, on more than one occasion, driven across the border
and obliged to seek refuge in Roman Armenia, whither his adversary
had no right to follow him. Even here, however, he was not safe.
Hazaravougd, at the risk of a rupture with Rome, pursued his flying foe
across the frontier; and Vahan was for some time in the greatest danger.
But the Persian system of constantly changing the commands of their
chief officers saved him. Hazaravougd received orders from the court to
deliver up Armenia to a newly appointed governor, named Sapor, and to
direct his own efforts to the recovery of Iberia, which was still
in insurrection. In this latter enterprise he was successful; Iberia
submitted to him; and Vakhtang fled to Colchis. But in Armenia the
substitution of Sapor for Hazaravougd led to disaster. After a vain
attempt to procure the assassination of Vahan by two of his officers,
whose wives were Roman prisoners, Sapor moved against him with a strong
body of troops; but the brave Mamigonian, falling upon his assailant
unawares, defeated him with great loss, and dispersed his army. A second
battle was fought with a similar result; and the Persian force, being
demoralized, had to retreat; while Vajian, taking the offensive,
established himself in Dovin, and once more rallied to his side the
great mass of the nation. Affairs were in this state, when suddenly
there arrived from the east intelligence of the most supreme importance,
which produced a pause in the Armenian conflict and led to the placing
of Armenian affairs on a new footing.
Perozes had, from the conclusion of his treaty with the Ephthalite
monarch (ab. A.D. 470), been tormented with the feeling that he had
suffered degradation and disgrace. He had, perhaps, plunged into the
Armenian and other wars in the hope of drowning the recollection of his
shame, in his own mind as well as in the minds of others. But fortune
had not greatly smiled on him in these struggles; and any credit that
he obtained from them was quite insufficient to produce forgetfulness
of his great disaster. Hence, as time went on, he became more and more
anxious to wipe out the memory of the past by a great and signal victory
over his conquerors. He therefore after some years determined to renew
the war. It was in vain that the chief Mobed opposed himself to this
intention; it was in vain that his other counsellors sought to dissuade
him, that his general, Bahram, declared against the infraction of the
treaty, and that the soldiers showed themselves reluctant to fight.
Perozes had resolved, and was not to be turned from his resolution. He
collected from all parts of the empire a veteran force, amounting, it
is said, 50 to 100,000 men, and 500 elephants, placed the direction of
affairs at the court in the hands of Balas (Palash), his son or brother,
and then marched upon the north-eastern frontier, with the determination
to attack and defeat the Ephthalites or perish in the attempt. According
to some Oriental writers he endeavored to escape the charge of having
falsified his engagements by a curious subterfuge. The exact terms of
his oath to Khush-newaz, the Ephthalite king, had been that he would
never march his forces past a certain pillar which that monarch had
erected to mark the boundary line between the Persian and Ephthalite
dominions. Perozes persuaded himself that he would sufficiently observe
his engagement if he kept its letter; and accordingly he lowered
the pillar, and placed it upon a number of cars, which were attached
together and drawn by a train of fifty elephants, in front of his army.
Thus, however deeply he invaded the Ephthalite country, he never “passed
beyond” the pillar which he had sworn not to pass. In his own judgment
he kept his vow, but not in that of his natural advisers. It is
satisfactory to find that the Zoroastrian priesthood, speaking by the
mouth of the chief Mobed, disclaimed and exposed the fallacy of this
wretched casuistry.
The Ephthalite monarch, on learning the intention of Perozes, prepared
to meet his attack by stratagem. He had taken up his position in the
plain near Balkh, and had there established his camp, resolved to await
the coming of the enemy. During the interval he proceeded to dig a deep
and broad trench in front of his whole position, leaving only a space
of some twenty or thirty yards, midway in the work, untouched. Having
excavated the trench, he caused it to be filled with water, and
covered carefully with boughs of trees, reeds, and earth, so as to be
undistinguishable from the general surface of the plain on which he was
encamped. On the arrival of the Persians in his front, he first of all
held a parley with Perozes, in which, after reproaching him with his
ingratitude and breach of faith, he concluded by offering to renew the
peace. Perozes scornfully refused; whereupon the Ephthalite prince hung
on the point of a lance the broken treaty, and, parading it in front of
the Persian troops, exhorted them to avoid the vengeance which was sure
to fall on the perjured by deserting their doomed monarch. Upon this,
half the army, we are told, retired; and Khush-newaz proceeded to effect
the destruction of the remainder by means of the plan which he had so
carefully prepared beforehand. He sent a portion of his troops across
the ditch, with orders to challenge the Persians to an engagement, and,
when the fight began, to fly hastily, and, returning within the ditch
by the sound passage, unite themselves with the main army. The entire
Persian host, as he expected, pursued the fugitives, and coming unawares
upon the concealed trench plunged into it, was inextricably entangled,
and easily destroyed. Perozes himself, several of his sons, and most of
his army perished. Mruz-docht, his daughter, the chief Mobed, and great
numbers of the rank and file were made prisoners. A vast booty was
taken. Khush-newaz did not tarnish the glory of his victory by any
cruelties; he treated the captives tenderly, and caused search to be
made for the body of Perozes, which was found and honorably interred.
Thus perished Perozes, after a reign of (probably) twenty-six years.
He was undoubtedly a brave prince, and entitled to the epithet of Al
Merdaneh, “the Courageous,” which he received from his subjects. But
his bravery, unfortunately, verged upon rashness, and was unaccompanied
(so far as appears) by any other military quality. Perozes had neither
the sagacity to form a good plan of campaign, nor the ability to conduct
a battle. In all the wars wherein he was personally engaged he was
unsuccessful, and the only triumphs which gilded his arms wore gained by
his generals. In his civil administration, on the contrary, he obtained
a character for humanity and justice; and, if the Oriental accounts
of his proceedings during the great famine are to be regarded as
trustworthy, we must admit that his wisdom and benevolence were such as
are not commonly found in those who bear rule in the East. His conduct
towards Khush-newaz has generally been regarded as the great blot upon
his good fame; and it is certainly impossible to justify the paltry
casuistry by which he endeavored to reconcile his actions with his words
at the time of his second invasion. But his persistent hostility towards
the Ephthalites is far from inexcusable, and its motive may have been
patriotic rather than personal. He probably felt that the Ephthalite
power was among those from which Persia had most to fear, and that it
would have been weak in him to allow gratitude for a favor conferred
upon himself to tie his hands in a matter where the interests of his
country were vitally concerned. The Ephthalites continued for nearly a
century more to be among the most dangerous of her neighbors to Persia;
and it was only by frequent attacks upon them in their own homes
that Persia could reasonably hope to ward off their ravages from her
territory.
It is doubtful whether we possess any coins of Hormisdas III., the
brother and predecessor of Perozes. Those which are assigned to him by
Mordtmann bear a name which has no resemblance to his; and those bearing
the name of Ram, which Mr. Taylor considers to be coins of Hormisdas,
cannot have been issued under his authority, since Ram was the
guardian and general, not of Hormisdas, but of his brother. Perhaps the
remarkable specimen figured by M. Longperier in his valuable work, which
shows a bull’s head in place of the usual inflated ball, may really
belong to this prince. The legend upon it is read without any doubt
as Auhrimazd, or “Hormisdas;” and in general character it is certainly
Sassanian, and of about this period. [PLATE XXI., Fig. 5.]
The coins of Perozes are undoubted, and are very numerous. They are
distinguished generally by the addition to the ordinary crown of two
wings, one in front of the crown, and the other behind it, and bear the
legend, _Kadi Piruzi_, or _Mazdisn Kadi Piruzi_, i.e., “King Perozes,”
or “the Ormazd-worshipping king Perozes.” The earring of the monarch
is a triple pendant. On the reverse, besides the usual fire-altar
and supporters, we see on either side of the altar-flame a star and
a crescent. The legend here is M--probably for malka, “king”--or
else Kadi, together with a mint-mark. The mints named are numerous,
comprising (according to Mordtmann) Persepolis, Ispahan, Rhages,
Nehavend, Darabgherd, Zadracarta, Nissa, Behistun, Chuzistan, Media,
Kerman, and Azerbijan; or (according to Mr. Thomas) Persepolis, Rasht,
Nehavend, Darabgherd, Baiza, Modai’n, Merv, Shiz, Iran, Kerman, Yezd,
and fifteen others. The general character of the coinage is rude and
coarse, the reverse of the coins showing especial signs of degradation.
[PLATE XXI., Fig. 6.]
Besides his coins, one other memorial of the reign of Perozes has
escaped the ravages of time. This is a cup or vase, of antique and
elegant form, engraved with a hunting-scene, which has been thus
described by a recent writer: “This cup, which comes from Russia, has
a diameter of thirty-one centimetres, and is shaped like a ewer without
handles. At the bottom there stands out in relief the figure of a
monarch on horseback, pursuing at full speed various wild animals;
before him fly a wild boar and wild sow, together with their young, an
ibex, an antelope, and a buffalo. Two other boars, an ibex, a buffalo,
and an antelope are strewn on the ground, pierced with arrows. The king
has an aquiline nose, an eye which is very wide open, a short beard,
horizontal moustaches of considerable length, the hair gathered behind
the head in quite a small knot, and the ear ornamented with a double
pendant, pear-shaped; the head of the monarch supports a crown, which
is mural at the side and back, while it bears a crescent in front; two
wings surmounting a globe within a crescent form the upper part of the
head-dress. On his right the king carries a short dagger and a quiver
full of arrows, on his left a sword. Firuz, who has the finger-guard
of an archer on his right hand, is represented in the act of bending a
large bow made of horn.” There would seem to be no doubt that the work
thus described is rightly assigned to Perozes.