Roger Pearse

Eutychius (=Sa`id ibn Bitriq) is still writing the history of the 5th century AD, mainly from Greek/Byzantine chroniclers.  But he also has access to an Arabic translation of a lost Persian chronicle of the Sassanid kings, and material from this is inserted at intervals.  We now return to the Sassanid history.  

The major threat to the Sassanid realm during the 5th century was not the Romans, but rather the Ephthalites, or White Huns, here called the Hayātilah. These were a nomadic East Iranian nation (or so their names suggest) based in the area of modern Afghanistan.  Eutychius, writing five centuries later, describes the two campaigns of King Peroz I (=Firuz) against them, which ended in his complete defeat and death in 483 AD at the battle of Herat.  This left Persia tributary to the White Huns for a generation. 

The common cultural links between the adversaries are apparent in the shared values on each side. 

7. As for Firuz, son of Yazdağard, king of the Persians, he built two cities near Kashkar, namely Duris-Firuz and Rām-Firuz.  Then he went with the army towards Khurasan in order to occupy the territory of Khshunwār.  When Akhshunwār, king of the Hayātilah, in Balkh, heard this, he was afraid, and he called his experts and asked their advice about what to do.  One of them spoke thus: “If you promise me with my peace and quiet that you will give me what will sustain my family and my descendants and that you will ensure them these necessaries, I will show you a way in which God will grant you victory over Firuz”.  Having received a full guarantee from the king, he said: “Tie up my hands and feet”,^[1] then abandon me on the road that Firuz will take, and I will save you from his hands.”  The king ordered that it should be done as requested, and they took him and threw him where he had told them, and they left. Curious about him, Firuz asked him the reason for his state, and [the man] replied: “I was one of the magnates of Hayātilah.  As soon as news came that you were marching against us, Khshunwār consulted, among others, myself also, and I told him openly that he could do nothing against Firuz because of the great power of this man, and that it would be better for him if he sent word to be ready to pay tribute and the ransom. Great was his anger against me, and he ordered them to reduce me to the state in which you see me, saying: ‘Let it be with him as with so many.’  He gave instructions to some of his soldiers, telling them: ‘Go and carry him to Firuz’.  O please, I beg you, have mercy and compassion on me, take me with you, so that I do not fall prey to the wild beasts in this deserted land.  I will show you the shortest way, and how to defeat Akhshunwār without suffering damage, and I have my revenge on him through God.  The road I will show you is only two days’ journey, but in the end you will get what you seek.”

On hearing this, the ministers of Firuz smelled the trap that Akhshunwār intended for them, and they said to Firuz: “This man has been asked for advice and he has certainly given according to his vast knowledge and intelligence.  All this dramatic stuff is a trap, pure and simple.  If fact Akhshunwār had reduced him to such, driven by anger, he would not bother to let us meet him in this deserted land.  Put no faith in what he says.  Perhaps Akhshunwār and his men have already visited the place that this man has shown us, and have deployed plenty of soldiers there.”

But Firuz was not of the same opinion, and he continued to walk in the company of this man for the two days but without arriving at the place indicated.  Firuz asked him for an explanation, and [the man] replied: “I calculated the path wrongly, but today will end it.”  When they had also walked all that day, asking all the time how much further they had to go, the man kept saying they were going to get there, and that he was not misleading them.  When they realized that they were out of all the food and water they had, and that they were in a place where they could not go back, he told them the truth.  Then the advisers of Firuz said: “We told the truth, O king, but you would not accept our advice.  Now we must just continue, in the hope of finding water.”  So they carried on, dividing themselves to right and left, in search of water.  Most of them died of thirst.

Firuz and a small number of brave warriors survived, who went with him until they reached their enemies, who met them that night, in the condition that they were in, and parlayed.  Then Firuz asked Akhshunwār to grant him and the men that were left to return to their countries, and to enter into a covenant with him, in which they promised not to make war again for the rest of his life, establishing between him and his kingdom a border that neither would ever pass.  Akhshunwār agreed.  Firuz placed this in writing, making himself guarantor, and swore that it never would be broken, and returned to his own kingdom.

Time passed.  Then Firuz remembered what had passed between him and Akhshunwār, and he felt annoyed and was afraid that there might be less loyalty [towards himself].  This motivated him to attack him again.  But his servants said to him: “You have entered into a covenant with him and we are afraid of the consequences of  the betrayal and injustice that you mean to perpetrate.”  But Firuz said to them: “I simply agreed with him that I would not pass the [border] stone. Well, I will take this stone with me on the cart in front of me, and never go beyond it.”  But they answered: “The deal is not based on your interpretation, but on what was clearly understood.”  Firuz paid no attention to their words and left to invade [the territory] of Akhshunwār.  Hearing of this, Akhshunwār was extremely surprised, and had no doubt about the treachery.  So he wrote to Firuz, reminding him what was assumed under the agreement entered into by him, and asking him to leave him alone.  But Firuz ignored his words and continued on his way, until he came near to the territory of the Hayātilah.  Akhshunwār had dug a ditch between his country and that of Firuz.  Firuz ordered bridges to be built, so he could pass over, and flags to be hoisted on them that serve as signals in case of retreat.  When the soldiers were deployed for combat, Akhshunwār sent word to Firuz to go outside with him, in the middle of the two sides, because he wanted to talk to him.  Akhshunwār met him and told him: ‘For my part, I believe that nothing has pushed to the point where you are but shame at your defeat.  But, on my life, if you had been cheated as you think, we would certainly have demanded more than that.  Yet the violation of the pact should be more shameful for you than that.  Think of this, and distinguish between these two things, pondering which one is good for you because of shame: to say “He ordered them to achieve something but it was not realized and his enemy had the better of him and those who were with him, but he was generous with them and sent them away free, on conditions”, or that they say “He broke the pact and the agreement, returned a favor with an insult”? Your men will know that you have involved them in a unjust business, even although you’re not sure to win, and are trying to do something which others may do to you.  If you win, you will not have a good reputation, nor will what is done will be worthy of praise.  And if you lose, you will cover yourself and your soldiers with infamy. Be careful, then! I warned you!  Telling you the words that you hear is not because of some weakness or fear for myself or my soldiers, but I want to say all these words to persuade, and not to save myself in some way.”

8. Firuz replied: “I am not one of those who, intimidated by menaces, allow themselves to be diverted from exactly the business that the intimidation is intended to counteract.  If I had thought that I was intending to do something as a piece of disloyalty on my part, no one else would feel more shame than me.  But I only signed the pact with you because of what I concealed within me.  Do not be deceived by the inferiority and weakness in which we met the first time. Know that I will not leave you alone until I have got back what you got from me.”

Akhshunwār replied: “Don’t bother with the error with which you try to deceive yourself, carrying the boundary-stone in front of you.  The terms and clauses of an agreement are according to words openly spoken, and not according to what they may be made to mean.  And the worst condition is the violation of the terms and provisions of an agreement.”

But Firuz ignored his words and so passed that day. Firuz said to his men: “Akhshunwār gave proof of a brilliant conversation, and I have never seen a mount like the horse he rode.  In fact, it never moved its feet, nor raised its hooves from their position, or done anything to speak of for the entire time we faced each other.”

And Akhshunwār told his men: “Finding myself at the front, I saw, and you’ve seen too, a Firuz all covered with arms.  He never moved on his horse, never removed his foot from the stirrup, nor did he ever bend, or turn right or left, as I often supported myself on the one or the other hip, I bent over my horse, I have looked back and forward with my eyes, as he stood erect and motionless. “

Both Firuz and Akhshunwār resorted to these descriptions because they spread their words among the soldiers, and thus diverted them from inquiring about what they discussed.

When they awoke, Akhshunwār pulled out the sheet on which Firuz had put [the agreement] in writing, and had it raised on a spear, so that the soldiers could see it.  Akhshunwār proclaimed victory over Firuz.

Firuz was defeated, and while fleeing started down a different path from the one with banners on the bridges to show him the way back; he took refuge in the ditch, in to which his men fell one after another.  Akhshunwār took everything that was with Firuz and his sons, and distributed the property among his soldiers. Then Akhshunwār said the advisors of Firuz: “Why didn’t you advise him and avoid this?”  They answered, “We did, but he would not listen.”

In Sigistān a member of the family of Azdashīr called Sūkhrān was in command. He was a Persian nobleman and had with him a number of generals as his subordinates.  When he heard the news of what had happened to Firuz, he moved at once with his men to the territory of the Hayātilah, where he soon gathered up the soldiers of Firuz. His power became great and strong.  When he was in sight of the army of Akhshunwār, he sent him a message:  “I did not come to fight you, but only so that you can return the property of Firuz, which you have, and release the prisoners that you have with you.  Let this be the basis for peace among ourselves and for our part we will abstain from any belligerent actions towards you.  If you agree, we will do the same, and we will withdraw; if you refuse then I fear that you will regret it.” Akhshunwār agreed to what Sūkhrān asked, freed their captives, returned their possessions, and departed, so that all ended with his and their satisfaction.  Then Sūkhrān retired to Ctesiphon.  The people of Persia remembered what he had done for them and they were grateful.

1. ^[1]Pirone: ‘In another text he says, “Amputate my [hands and feet]”, which is undoubtedly more accurate.↩

We continue our translation of the Annals of Eutychius, melkite patriarch of Alexandria.  The text has reached the second half of the 5th century AD.  Marcian became emperor in 450 AD.  At this point Eutychius (or Sa`id ibn Bitriq as he was known) again relates material from a lost Sassanid Persian chronicle.  As before, “Rum” is the Arabic name for the Eastern Romans. 

1. In the sixth year of the reign of Marcian, king of Rum, Yazdagard, son of Bahram, king of the Persians, died.  On the death of Yazdagard, his two sons Firuz and Hurmuz contested the kingdom.  Some took the side of Firuz and others the side of Hurmuz.  After fierce fighting between the supporters of the two parties, Hurmuz was killed along with three members of his family.  Firuz, son of Yazdagard reigned over the Persians for twenty-seven years.  This was in the sixth year of the reign of Marcian, king of Rum.  King Marcian had the true faith, and he defended and promoted the faith of the Melkites.

2. King Marcian died. After him Leo the Great reigned over Rum, for sixteen years.  This happened in the second year of the reign of Firuz, son of Yazdagard, king of the Persians.  Leo was of the true faith, a Melkite.  When the inhabitants of Alexandria came to know of the death of Marcian, they rose up against Proterius, patriarch of Alexandria, and killed him in the church of Kūriyon; they brought his body on a camel to the great hippodrome that Ptolemy Lagus had built and they burned it.  Then there appeared in the sky a cloud of fire and there was thunder, lightning and violent storms for forty days.  Proterius was killed after having held the office for six years.  After him Timothy, brother of Anatolius, better known as Yānūriyūs, was made patriarch of Alexandria.  He was a Jacobite.  He held the office for three years.  Then a general named Balāwus came to Alexandria from Constantinople, who deposed Timothy, exiling him to a place called Marsūfin, a village on the coast of the Pontic Sea, and made another Timothy, better known as Swrs, Patriarch of Alexandria.  He was a Jacobite.  He held the seat for fifteen years and died.

3. In the sixteenth year of the reign of Leo the Great, Martin was made patriarch of Jerusalem.  He was a Jacobite.  He held the office for eight years and died.  In the tenth year of his reign Acacius was made patriarch of Constantinople.  He held the office for thirteen years and died.  In the twelfth year of his reign John was made patriarch of Antioch.  He held the seat for six years and died.  In the thirteenth year of his reign Julian was made patriarch of Antioch.  He held the office for five years and died.  In the eighth year of his reign Hilary was made patriarch of Rome.  He held the seat for six years and died.  In the sixteenth year of his reign Sīlfnūs was made patriarch of Rome.  He held the seat for fourteen years and died. This patriarch excommunicated Timothy, brother of Anatolius, Patriarch of Alexandria.

Leo the Great, King of Rum, died.  After him Leo the Less reigned over Rum, for one year only.  He was a Jacobite.  This happened in the eighteenth year of the reign of Firuz, son of Yazdağard, king of the Persians.

4. Leo the Less, king of the Rum, died.  After him his son Zeno reigned over Rum for seventeen years.  He was a Jacobite.  This was in the nineteenth year of the reign of Firūz, king of the Persians.  While the king Zeno was out strolling in a place called Surah, a man named Basiliscus, along with his son Marcus, took over the kingdom for twenty months.  The fighting between them did not stop until Zeno got the better of them, returned to Constantinople, killed Basiliscus and his son, confiscated their homes and possessions, and put to death all their supporters.  At that time there was a great earthquake in the city of Constantinople; the sun was darkened, and the stars appeared in the sky in broad daylight. Many houses collapsed and many people died because of the violence of the earthquake.  This happened in the ninth year of the reign of Zeno, king of Rum.

In the second year of his reign Timothy, patriarch of Alexandria, better known as Swrs, fled to Wadi-Habib, and Timothy, brother of Anatolius, returned from Marsūfin to the patriarchal see of Alexandria, held the office for two years and died.  After him the archdeacon Peter was made patriarch of Alexandria.  He was a Jacobite.  He held the office for thirty-six days and fled to Constantinople.  Then Timothy, better known as Swrs, returned from Wadi-Habib^[1], was patriarch for four years and died.

In the ninth year of the reign of Zeno, Ibn Ghustus was governor of Alexandria, on behalf of Zeno.  Then John became Patriarch of Alexandria.  He was a Jacobite.  He held the office for six months.  Then another governor came to Alexandria on behalf of Zeno, called Aughustāliyūs, together with Peter, the patriarch who had fled to Constantinople.  The general Ibn Ghustus fled before Awghustāliyus and the patriarch John fled with him also.  So the patriarch Peter, who had fled, reoccupied his own place.  He held the office for eight years and died.  In the sixteenth year of the reign of Zeno Abinās was made patriarch of Alexandria.  He was a Jacobite.  He held the seat for seven years and died.  He built many churches in Alexandria and several burial sites.

5. At that time, the great hippodrome that Ptolemy Lagus had built in Alexandria, and where the patriarch Proterius had been burned, caught fire.  In the seventh year of the reign of Zeno Militūs was made patriarch of Jerusalem.  He was a Jacobite.  He held the office for eight years and died.  In the sixteenth year of his reign Elias was made patriarch of Jerusalem.  He held the seat for twenty-four years.^[2] He built churches and erected the church of Eleona, but did not finish it so it was [later] turned over to Aylah.^[3] At that time there were in Jerusalem Anba Theodosius, the founder of the monastery of ad-Dawākis, Anba Chariton, founder of the monastery of the Old Laura and Anba Saba, founder of the New Laura.

6. In the sixth year of the reign of Zeno Iwfūtiyūs was made patriarch of Constantinople.  He held the office for five years and died.  In the eleventh year of his reign^[4] Iwfathimiyūs was made patriarch of Constantinople.  He held the office for ten years and died.  In the first year of the reign of Zeno Peter, nicknamed the Fuller, was made patriarch of Antioch.  He was a Jacobite.  He held the seat for six years and was removed.^[5]  He was excommunicated and removed by Bāsīlīqūs, patriarch of Rome.  Once removed, Stephen was made patriarch of Antioch.  He held the office for only one year and died.  After him another Stephen was made patriarch of Antioch. He held the office for six months and died. After him Qalidiyūn was made patriarch of Antioch. He was a Nestorian.  He held the office for four years and died.  Then Peter the Fuller returned to occupy the Patriarchal See of Antioch.  He held the office for eight years and died.^[6].  After him Palladius was made patriarch of Antioch.  He held the office for ten years and died.  This happened in the eleventh year of the reign of Zeno, king of Rum.  In the thirteenth year of his reign Filnīqūs was made patriarch of Rome.  He held the office for eight years and died.

1. ^[1]Note by B. Pirone in the body of the text: ‘In another text it says “Dayr Habib”, which is undoubtedly more accurate’.↩
2. ^[2]Pirone: ‘in another text it says “for fourteen years”‘.↩
3. ^[3]Aqaba, location of a see in Byzantine times.↩
4. ^[4]Pirone: ‘In another text he says “in the twenty-first year of his reign”‘.↩
5. ^[5]Pirone: ‘in another text it says “for two years”‘.↩
6. ^[6]Pirone: ‘In another text he says, “for three years”‘↩

7. Theodosius the Less, king of Rum, died and after him Marian reigned over Rum, for six years.  This happened in the fourteenth year of the reign of Yazdagard, son of Bahram, king of the Persians.  When Marcian became king, the bishops of each country came to him, wished him a prosperous reign and spoke of the injustice that Dioscorus, Patriarch of Alexandria, had done at the second council held in Ephesus, the excommunication that had launched against the patriarchs who had died from the abuse they suffered because of him, of his adherence to the doctrine of the wicked Eutyches, his statement made of this, how he had introduced corruption into religion and the creed and how the doctrine of Eutyches had gained the upper hand among the people.  King Marcian ordered [his scribes] to write to Leo, patriarch of Rome, to Maximus, Patriarch of Antioch and to Juvenal, Patriarch of Jerusalem, who were noted by him along with their metropolitans and bishops.  He ordered [them] also to write to the bishops of the land of Rum, to gather in the city of Chalcedon to consider and examine the doctrine of Eutyches, what Dioscorus, Patriarch of Alexandria, had done, in adhering to the doctrine of Eutyches and excommunicating the patriarchs who were dead, and to define the Creed in light of what had been laid down by the three holy councils. Six hundred bishops gathered in the city of Chalcedon. Anatolius, patriarch of Constantinople, Maximus, Patriarch of Antioch and Juvenal, Patriarch of Jerusalem, presided over the meeting.  Leo, patriarch of Rome, wrote a letter to the king Marcian in which he set forth the true faith, that is the creed of the Melkites, and sent it to him by means of a priest chosen from among his disciples, named Boniface.  King Marcian sent the letter with the priest Boniface to the city of Chalcedon, to the bishops gathered there, and the priest Boniface was counted with the six hundred and thirty.  There were at the council the disciples of St Euthymius, i.e. Stephen, bishop of Barabiyā, and John, Bishop of the Barbarians.

Having gathered, they examined the falsity of the doctrine of Dioscorus, Patriarch of Alexandria, and took note of his adherence to the doctrine of Eutyches.  Dioscorus was then excommunicated, and Eutyches was excommunicated, and they confirmed that Jesus Christ our Lord, is man and God, sharing in the same substance as the Father in his divinity and of the same substance with our humanity, with two natures, perfect in his divinity and perfect in his humanity, one Christ.  Also they confirmed what the three hundred and eighteen bishops who had gathered in the city of Nicaea had already said, and embraced their doctrine, that is to say that the Son is consubstantial with the Father, light from light, true God from true God.  They excommunicated Arius and confirmed what the second council of the hundred and fifty bishops who had gathered in Constantinople against Macedonius had said, saying that the Holy Spirit is God, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are one God, one nature, three persons and three substances, and they excommunicated Macedonius.  They confirmed what the Third Council of Two hundred bishops who had gathered in the city of Ephesus for the first time against Nestorius had defined, saying that the Virgin Mary gave birth to God, i.e. our Lord Jesus Christ, who is of the same divine nature as the Father and of the same human nature as men, and testified that Christ is two natures, one person and one substance.  So they excommunicated Nestorius, and they excommunicated Dioscorus and anyone who professed his doctrine and deposed them. They excommunicated the second council which was held at Ephesus.  At this council the archdeacon of Alexandria, named Prūtāwus, was present, and they made him patriarch in place of the wicked and excommunicated Dioscorus.  From the third Council of Ephesus of two hundred bishops, who gathered at Ephesus for the first time and who had excommunicated Nestorius, to this Fourth Council, in which there were six hundred and thirty bishops who excommunicated Dioscorus and Eutyches and which was held in the city of Chalcedon, there were twenty-one years.

The inhabitants of Egypt and Alexandria had embraced the doctrine of Dioscorus and Eutyches and believed that Dioscorus had been excommunicated unfairly.  But through fear of king Marcian they did not dare to openly profess their doctrine.  As for Dioscorus, after being dismissed he went to Palestine and Jerusalem, and he corrupted the faith of those who were in Palestine and Jerusalem to the point that he professed his doctrine and there appointed his own bishops.  When Eudoxia, wife of King Theodosius, heard talk of the doctrine of Dioscorus, she embraced it and sent him many gifts.  At Jerusalem St Euthymius battled, and defended the doctrine of the Melkites.  So St Euthymius sent a message to Eudoxia: “Do not embrace the doctrine of Dioscorus because he has been deposed and excommunicated, he and all those who hold this doctrine. Return then, to the truth into which you were at first.” Eudoxia welcomed the words of St Euthymius, abandoned the doctrine of Dioscorus, returned to the truth and sent him many gifts.  Eudoxia then had many churches and monasteries built in Jerusalem.

8. In the third year of the reign of Marcian Anastasius was made patriarch of Jerusalem.  He was a Jacobite. He held the office for nineteen years and died.  In the [same] year Basil was made patriarch of Antioch. He held the office for two years and died.  In the fifth year of his reign Martyrius was made patriarch of Antioch.  He held the office for eight years and died.  In the sixth year of his reign Gennadius was made patriarch of Constantinople.  He held the office for ten years and died. At the time of King Marcian lived Simeon the recluse, called Stylites. He was the first monk to live in a sawma’a, [32] in the rural district of Antioch, on the mountain known as “al-Gabal al-mu’gib” [= Mount Admirable].  At that time St. Theodosius, the founder of the monastery of ad-Dawākis, left his country and went to Simeon the recluse at Antioch. He stayed for a few days with him, then he went to Jerusalem and embraced the monastic life.

32.  A term indicating a column with a habitation on the top.

5. This was the second council which was held in the city of Ephesus.  Presiding at this council were Dioscorus, Patriarch of Alexandria, Domnus, Patriarch of Antioch, Juvenal, Patriarch of Jerusalem and the legates of Leo, patriarch of Rome.  They examined the case of Eutyches along with that of Eusebius, bishop of Dorilea, and Flavian, Patriarch of Constantinople.  Dioscorus, Patriarch of Alexandria, confirmed the doctrine of Eutyches and excommunicated Flavian, Patriarch of Constantinople, and Eusebius, bishop of Dorilea.  But Domnus, Patriarch of Antioch, Juvenal, Patriarch of Jerusalem, Modestus, bishop of Ancyra, and Asa, Bishop of Edessa, along with many other bishops and the legates of Leo, patriarch of Rome, disapproved of the behavior of Dioscorus and rejected his doctrine as absurd. Dioscorus then excommunicated them and wrote to Leo, patriarch of Rome, and to all the priests, imposing excommunication and interdiction from the celebration of the Eucharist, if they refused to embrace the doctrine of Eutyches.  Convinced of this doctrine, Dioscorus left the city of Ephesus.  This happened in the fortieth year of the reign of Theodosius the Less.  The true faith was thus corrupted and the doctrine of Eutyches became the creed and [official] doctrine, especially in Egypt and Alexandria.  Even King Theodosius embraced the doctrine of Eutyches.

6. In the fortieth year of his reign, Flavian, Patriarch of Constantinople, who had excommunicated Dioscorus, died.  After him Athanasius was made patriarch of Constantinople. He held the office for nine years and died.  In his fourth year in office there was the fourth council, in the city of Chalcedon.  In the forty-first year of the reign of Theodosius Domnus, Patriarch of Antioch, who had excommunicated Dioscorus, died.  After him Maximus was made patriarch of Antioch. He held the office for four years and died.  In his third year in office there was the fourth council, in the city of Chalcedon. King Theodosius had a wife named Eudoxia.  The king was given an apple out of season and the king gave the apple to his wife Eudoxia.  One day when he was at the house of one of his nobles, he found the apple that had given to his wife.  The king reluctantly endured it, he was sad, and he thought that his wife Eudoxia was the mistress of the patrician.  So he exiled her to Jerusalem.