Материал: Payaslian S., The History of Armenia From the Origins to the Present

1

Dynasties and the

Geopolitics of Empire: The

Ervanduni and the

Artashesian Dynasties

The inhabitants of Armenia were in the throes of rebellion against their recent conqueror, King Darius I the Great of Persia, one of the greatest empire builders in history. Having briefly tasted local autonomy after the collapse of the Median empire, the rebels were in no mood to submit to yet another power. King Darius, a man of little tolerance for insubordination, had ascended to the Persian throne in 521 B.C. amid widespread political turmoil as rebellions shook the empire, and he was determined to resolve the crises. No sooner had he quelled the rebellions in the provinces of Elam and Babylon than fighting broke out in Media and Armenia, followed by uprisings in Sagartia, Hyrcania, and Margiana. By the ninth year of his reign, Darius I (521–485 B.C.) had suppressed eight major rebellions, including the revolt led by an ambitious imposter in Persia itself.1 Having completed his military campaigns and consolidated power, Darius of the great Achaemenian empire ordered a set of commemorative inscriptions to be cut on the Rock of Behistun, located by the small village of Behistun (or Bahistun; Bisitun) on the caravan road between today’s cities of Baghdad and Tehran. About 500 feet above the plain, the second column of the cuneiform inscriptions reads:

XXVI. [Thus] saith Darius the king: An Armenian named Dâdarshish, my servant, I sent into Armenia, and I said unto him: “Go, smite that host which

S. Payaslian, The History of Armenia

© Simon Payaslian 2007

is in revolt, and does not acknowledge me.” Then Dâdarshish went forth. When he was come into Armenia, the rebels assembled and advanced against Dâdarshish to give him battle. At a place in Armenia named [Zuzza] they fought the battle. Auramazda brought me help; by the grace of Auramazda did my army utterly overthrow that rebel host. On the eighth day of the month Thuravâhara the battle was fought by them.2

Here was recorded “Armina,” one of the earliest references to Armenia, the name used by foreigners for nearly three millennia.

Armenians refer to Armenia as Hayastan and to themselves as Hay. They are believed to have emerged in historic Armenia after centuries of cultural fusion among various native and migrating peoples, perhaps extending as far back as to the Hurrians, Hittites, and Phrygians, as suggested by Greek (Ionian) historian Herodotus (ca. 490–431 B.C), Strabo (ca. 63 B.C.–A.D. 21), and modern linguistic and cultural studies. During about the third and second millennia B.C, the Hurrians inhabited the area from the northeastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea to the Taurus Mountain range in Cilicia, across the Armenian highland to the Erzinjan region in the northeast, to present-day Kirkuk in Iraq in the southeast, and to modern Hama, Syria, in the south. The Hittites emerged as a dominant power in Asia Minor beginning in the nineteenth century B.C. and ruled the entire region from the Aegean Sea to the Mediterranean and to the Black Sea until their empire collapsed in the twelfth century B.C. The Thraco-Phrygians probably replaced the Hittites as a power in Asia Minor in about 1200 B.C. and expanded eastward to the Armenian highland by the eighth century B.C. As the historian Igor Diakanoff has noted, “The appearance in Asia Minor and the Armenian Highland of the ThracoPhrygian ethnos means that all the basic components from which the Armenian people were ultimately formed were now present.”3 The protoArmenian people inhabited the regions surrounding Lake Van: Nairi in the north and northeast; Arme-Shupria in the west and southwest; and Hayasa-Azzi farther west.4 Their religio-cultural traditions developed over centuries in four major phases. The first represented the oldest protoArmenian people as Hayassa-Azi in the region of Erznga (Erzinjan) on the plain of Erzerum. The second emerged in the region of Arme-Shupria, which included the vales of Kharpert and the Western Euphrates. The third developed on the shores of Lake Van, particularly the city of Van during the Urartian kingdom.5 The fourth phase witnessed the spread of Armenian culture across the Araratian plain to the shores of Lake Sevan.6

The Armenian Plateau rises from an average of 3,000 feet to 7,000 feet above sea level and covers about 235,000 square miles. This vast territory of mountains and valleys, rivers and ravines, and fertile lands is historic Armenia, the homeland of Armenian civilization for three millennia. The Pontus Mountains extend from the north to the Lesser

Caucasus and farther east to the Karabagh range to the north and northeast. The Anti-Taurus mountain ranges and the Euphrates River are located in the west, the Arax River and Lake Urmia to the east and southeast, and the Tigris River, the Taurus Mountains, and Mesopotamia to the south. In the current Republic of Armenia, the Areguni, Sevan, Vardenis, and Gegham mountains surround Lake Sevan. The most famous Armenian mountain, however, is Mount Ararat, a climb of more than 16,800 feet, where, according to the Bible, Noah’s ark is said to have landed. Historic Armenia consists of numerous rivers, including the Arax, the Western and Eastern Euphrates, the Tigris, the Hrazdan, and the Arpa. Armenians built their ancient capital cities (e.g., Armavir and Artashat) on the banks of the Arax River. The largest lakes are Van, Sevan, and Urmia.7 Most of historic Armenian lands currently constitute eastern Turkey. The geography of Armenia directly affected Armenian culture and economy. The mountain chains across the Armenian Plateau created distinct regions, each with its own local culture, dialect, traditions, and interests. Rich in natural resources, historic Armenia became a major center for international commerce in times of peace but also a battleground for military and cultural competition between major empires seeking hegemonic spheres of influence.8

THE URARTIANS

The kingdom of Urartu emerged in the region of Arme-Shupria in about 870 B.C. under King Aramu I. During its formative years, Kings Sarduri I, Ishpuini, and Menua, who ruled from the capital city of Van (Tushpa; Tosp), united the western regions of Nairi, Arme-Shupria, and Hayasa, and expanded their armies from modern Erzerum to Mount Ararat, from Lake Urmia to Lake Sevan farther east.9 The Urartians had their own indigenous culture and language, which were mixed with Hurrian, Hittite, Aramaic, and Assyrian influences.10 The combination of these cultures and languages set the foundations for the Armenian culture and language, although the latter is of Indo-European origins.11 Urartian religion venerated male and female gods, which were led by the male god Khaldi, the god of gods, whose wife, Arubani, served as the supreme female goddess. Appearing in military uniform, Khaldi often blessed the Urartian troops before they marched off to war. Other gods and goddesses included Teisheba (god of war) and his wife, Khuba; Shivini (the sun god) and his wife, Tushpua; Sardi, star goddess; Epaninaue, land goddess; Dsvininaue, sea or water goddess; and Babaninaue, mountain goddess. The local people worshiped the above gods, but also nature (e.g., tree worship [the concept of “holy tree”]) and the sun, the followers of which became known as the “arevordik.”12

The most developed regions in the Urartian kingdom were the Lake Van basin and the area between Lakes Van and Urmia, followed by the region of Lake Sevan. During the reign of King Argishti I (r. ca. 786–764), when Urartian power is said to have reached its zenith, the Urartian military conquered the vast region across the Araratian plain to the eastern shores of Lake Sevan. Having strengthened his position in the region, he founded the geostrategically significant fortress town of Erebuni (presentday Erevan) in 782 B.C., where he deployed nearly 6,600 Urartian troops and non-Urartian military slaves.13 The imperial economy centered on four principal sectors: the royal (state) economy, temple economies, individual or private land ownership, and the communes. The productive capacity of each sector rested on the political economy of slavery. The royal economy, based on large tracts of land that included hundreds and thousands of people, developed near rivers and lakes and on arable lands, and its agriculture included vineyards and large-scale farming. The Urartian king owned these lands, which were named after him—for example, Argishdikhenli (Armavir) on the Arax River and the Argishduna fortress south of Lake Van. The king and the members of the royal family granted lands and slaves as gifts and patronage to their supporters and relatives.14 Armavir later emerged as the first capital of the Armenian people.

The temple economies played a very important role in the national economy. Each god in the Urartian pantheon had its own temples whose economies were based on agricultural production (as, for instance, the vineyards at the famed temple of Musasir located southeast of Lake Van), animal husbandry, and trade in domestic and regional markets. The economies of private landholders were run by the members of the nobility, including the leading members of the administrative and military bureaucracies. The economic and financial relations between the royal family and the military were particularly important as a strong monarchy required a prosperous economy, while the military establishment not only defended the borders but also brought in slaves whose labors contributed to the local economies. Equally important were the communes, which consisted of rural and urban economies and were owned mostly by azat (free) people who were neither part of the nobility nor slaves. Each commune had its own internal leadership structure and served as the primary base for taxation for royal revenues. The communes’ cooperation with the royal court and the state bureaucracies were rewarded by a grant of additional land or slaves.

Wars and forced migrations constituted the primary means to capture slaves. In some wars, they totaled in the thousands. Argishti I, for example, is said to have brought 320,000 slaves to Urartu after his successful military campaign against the Hatti and Dsopk in the 780s. A large number

were taken to the northeast to build the fortress city of Erebuni.15 There was an inherent cycle in such ventures: the more successful a war, the greater the number of slaves; the greater the number of slaves, the greater the economic development (construction of cities, fortresses, irrigation canals, roads); the greater the economic development, the greater the need for slaves; and the greater the need for slaves, the greater the propensity to engage in wars. Loss in war led to loss of slaves and destruction. The most loyal among the slaves were employed in the royal economy, while others served in the temple economies. Most of them, however, worked for state bureaucracies on the construction and maintenance of cities, canals, roads, and fortresses. Some slaves escaped both Urartian and Assyrian rule and inhabited the areas between the two, in the region of Arme-Shupria west of Lake Van, and in the east of Urartu—that is, the Karabagh region— where (especially in the mountainous areas) they developed a tradition of guerrilla warfare.

The Urartian state hierarchy consisted of the central government and local principalities. At the apex of the political system stood the king, a hereditary office with absolutist powers. He led the royal court, which encompassed various ministries and a small circle of close advisers. The ministries included hundreds of high-level officials, thousands of administrators and secretaries, and hundreds of servants (including wine makers, architects, rug makers, and others). The administrative ministries were usually headed by the members of the royal family and included the military bureaucracies for internal security and war. Regional governors maintained law and order, transferred local agricultural production to the royal court and related financial institutions, and were responsible for the collection of taxes. These administrative institutions were available for the king to centralize or decentralize power as necessary, but weaknesses in the hierarchy could potentially undermine the king’s leadership. Some kings were more successful than others as leaders, but wars proved to be the ultimate test of the loyalty of local officials and nobilities.16

Urartian kings Aramu (r. 870–845 B.C.), Sarduri I (r. 845–825), Menua (r. 810–785), and Argishti I (r. 785–760) were unusually powerful monarchs, but others, such as Sarduri II (r. 760–735) and Rusa I (r. 735–714), failed to maintain stability. Internal disunity and military failures against the Assyrians during the reign of Rusa II (r. 685–645) led to the decline of the Urartian kingdom, which finally collapsed in about 590 B.C. The demise of the Urartian empire should have enabled the Assyrian army to conquer a large part of the Urartian territories, but the Assyrian empire itself began to experience domestic turmoil, which by 600 B.C. proved insurmountable.17

The geopolitical vacuum created by the disintegration of both empires enabled the Medes to expand their power over most of former Urartian