Arsacidae

1. The name of a dynasty of Parthian kings. [Arsaces.]

2. The name of a dynasty of Armenian kings, who reigned over Armenia during the wars of the Romans with Mithridates the Great, king of Pontus, and with the Parthians. The history of this dynasty is involved in great difficulties, as the Latin and Greek authors do not always agree with the Armenian historians, such as Moses Chorenensis, Faustus Byzantinus, and others. The Romans do not call the dynasty of the Armenian kings by the name of Arsacidae; they mention several kings of the name of Arsaces, and others descended from the Parthian dynasty of the Arsacidae, and they seem not to have known several kings mentioned by the Armenian historians. On the other hand, the Armenian writers know but one dynasty reigning in Armenia during that period, and they do not mention several kings spoken of by the Romans; or, if they mention their names, they do not consider them as kings. The consequence of this is, that every account based exclusively on Roman and Greek writers would be incomplete; they want to be compared with the Armenian historians, and thus only a satisfactory result can be obtained. Several attempts have been made to reconcile the different statements of the western and eastern historians, as the reader may see from the notes of the brothers Whiston and the works of Vaillant, Du Four de Longuerue, Richter, and especially St. Martin, which are cited below.

The expression "kings of Armenia" is in many instances vague, and leads to erroneous conclusions, especially with regard to the Arsacidae. The transactions of the Romans with Armenia will present much less difficulties if the student will remember that he has to do with kings in Armenia, and kings of Armenian origin reigning in countries beyond the limits of Armenia. The history of the Arsacidae cannot be well understood without a previous knowledge of the other dynasties before and after that of the Arsacidae; for Armenian kings were known to the Greeks long before the accession of the Arsacidae; and the annals of the Eastern empire mention many important transactions with kings of Armenia, belonging to those dynasties, which reigned in this country during a period of almost a thousand years after the fall of the Arsacidae. But as any detailed account would be out of place here, we can give only a short sketch. I. DYNASTY of HAÏG

Founded by Haig, the son of Gathlas, who is said to have lived B. C. 2107. Fifty-nine kings belong to this dynasty, and among them Zarmair, who, according to the Armenian historians, assisted the Trojans at the siege of their city, where he commanded a body of Assyrians ; Dikran or Tigranes, a prince mentioned by Xenophon (Xen. Cyrop. 3.1, 5.1, 3, 8.3, 4) ; and Wahe, the last of his house, who fell in a battle with Alexander the Great in B. C. 328. The names of the fifty-nine kings, the duration of their reigns, and some other historical facts, mixed up with fabulous accounts, are given by the Armenian historians. II. SEVEN GOVERNORS

Seven governors appointed by Alexander, and after his death by the Seleucidae, during the period from 328 to 149 B. C. III. DYNASTY OF THE ARSACIDAE

From B. C. 149 to A. D. 428. See below. IV. PERSIAN GOVERNORS

From A. D. 428 to 625. V. GREEK AND ARABIAN GOVERNORS

from A. D. 632 to 855. VI. DYNASTY OF THE PAGRATIDAE

from 855 to 1079. The Pagratidae, a noble family of Jewish origin, settled in Armenia in B. C. 600, according to the Armenian historians. They were one of the most powerful families in Armenia. After they had come to the throne, they sometimes were compelled to pay tribute to the khalifs and to the emperors of Constantinople, and in later times they lost a considerable part of Armenia. A branch of this family reigned at Kars for a considerable time after 1079. Another branch acquired the kingdom of Georgia, which it possessed down to the present day, when the last king, David, ceded his kingdom to Russia, in which country his descendants are still living. The princes of Bagration in Russia are likewise descended from the Pagratidae, another branch of whom settled in Imerethia in the Caucasus, and its descendants still belong to the principal chiefs of that country. VII. DYNASTY OF THE ARDZRUNIANS

said to have been descended from the ancient kings of Assyria. Several members of it were appointed governors of Armenia by the first khalifs. In A. D. 855, this family became independent in the northern part of Armenia in the country round the upper part of the Euphrates. Adom and Abusahl, the last Ardzrunians, were killed in 1080 by the emperor Nicephorus Botaniates, who united their dominions with the Byzantine empire. VIII. MOHAMMEDAN DYNASTIES.

1. Of Kurdish origin, from A. D. 984 to A. D. 1085. 2. Of Turkoman origin, from A. D. 1084 to A. D. 1312. They resided in different places, and the extent of their dominions varied according to the military success of the khalifs of Egypt and the Seljukian princes. IX. DYNASTIES OF DIFFERENT ORIGIN

from the eleventh to the fourteenth century. Some kings belonged to the Pagratidae, among whom was the celebrated Haython I. or Hethum in 1224; and some were Latin princes, among whom was Leo VI. of Lusignan, who was driven out by the khalif of Egypt, and died in Paris in 1393, the last king of Armenia. Otto, duke of Brunswick, from whom is descended the present house of Hanover, was crowned as king of Armenia in Germany, but he never entered the country. THE DYNASTY OF THE ARSACIDAE.

(See above, No. III.) It has already been said, that there are considerable discrepancies between the statements of the Romans and those of the Armenians concerning this dynasty. The Romans tell us that Artaxias, governor of Armenia Magna for Antiochus the Great, king of Syria, made himself independent in his government B. C. 188; and that Zadriates became king of Armenia Minor, of which country he was praefect. The descendents of Artaxias became extinct with Tigranes III., who was driven out by Caius Caesar; and among the kings who reigned after him, there are many who were not Arsacidae, but belonged to other Asiatic dynasties. The Armenians on the contrary say, that the dynasty of the Arsacidae was founded by Valarsaces or Wagharshag, the brother of Mithridates Arsaces [Arsaces III.], king of Parthia, by whom he was established on the throne of Armenia in B. C. 149. A younger branch of the Arsacidae was founded by Arsham or Ardsham, son of Ardashes (Artaxes) and brother of the great Tigranes, who reigned at Edessa, and whose descendants became masters of Armenia Magna after the extinction of the Arsacidae in that country with the death of Tiridates I., who was established on the throne by Nero, and who died most probably in A. D. 62. The Armenian historians have treated with particular attention the history of the younger branch; they speak but little about the earlier transactions with Rome; and they are almost silent with regard to those kings, the offspring of the kings of Pontus and Judaea, who were imposed upon Armenia by the Romans. From this we may conclude, that the Armenians considered those instruments of the Romans as intruders and political adventurers, and that the Arsacidae were the only legitimate dynasty. Thus they sometimes speak of kings unknown to the Romans, and who perhaps were but pretenders, who had succeeded in preserving an obscure independence in some inaccessible corner of the mountains of Armenia. On the other hand the Romans, with all the pride and haughtiness of conquerors, consider their instruments or allies alone as the legitimate kings, and they generally speak of the Arsacidae as a family imposed upon Armenia by the Parthians. As to the origin of the Armenian Arsacidae, both the Romans and Armenians agree, that they were descended from the dynasty of the Parthian Arsacidae, an opinion which was so generally established, that Procopius (De Aedificiis Justinini, 3.1) says, that nobody had the slightest doubt on the fact. But as to the origin of the earlier kings, who according to the Romans were not Arsacidae, we must prefer the statements of the Armenians, who, as all Orientals, paid great attention to the genealogy of their great families, and who say that those kings were Arsacidae.

The Persian historians know this dynasty by the name of the Ashcanians, and tell us, that its founder was one Ashk, who lived at the time of Alexander the Great. But the Persian authors throw little light upon the history of the Arsacidae. A series of the kings, according to the Romans, is necessary for understanding their historians. But as their statements are rather one-sided, they will be found insufficient not only for a closer investigation into the history of Armenia, but also for many other events connected with the history of the eastern empire. It has, therefore, been thought advisable to give first the series of the kings according to the Roman writers, and afterwards a series of these kings according to the Roman accounts combined with those of the Armenians. The chronology of this period has not yet been satisfactorily fixed, and many points remain vague.

The following is a series of the Arsacidae and other kings of Armenia according to the Romans.

The name of a dynasty of Parthian kings. (See Arsaces.) It was also the name of a dynasty of Armenian kings, who reigned in Armenia from B.C. 149 to A.D. 428.