The End of the Artaxiad Dynasty and the Struggle for Armenian Independence

After the death of Tigran IV, the Artaxiad dynasty ceased to exist. However, Rome was hesitant to complicate its relations with Armenia. Emperor Augustus understood that further expansion of the empire could have unpredictable negative consequences for the country.

He was content with the existence of a system of dependent states. Among these states was the Kingdom of Greater Armenia. Guided by this idea, Rome placed individuals with distant familial ties to the Artaxiad dynasty on the Armenian throne, giving them traditional names like “Artashes” and “Tigran,” and requiring them to swear loyalty to their patron, the emperor.

According to Augustus’s plan, the king of Atropatene-Marastan, Ariobarzanes, who likely had Artaxiad lineage through his mother, was crowned king of Armenia. With this move, Rome established a united and strong kingdom of Armenia-Atropatene in the East against its long-time enemy, Parthia.

However, the appointment of Ariobarzanes as the Armenian king led to fierce uprisings, which in 2 AD escalated into a powerful anti-Roman rebellion. To suppress it, Gaius Caesar arrived in Armenia. The fortress of Artagers stood out for its heroic and powerful resistance. After the fortress was finally conquered at great cost, negotiations began between the parties.

The fortress guard, Addon, unexpectedly stabbed Gaius Caesar with a dagger and then committed suicide. After suppressing the rebellion, the Romans proclaimed Ariobarzanes as the king of Armenia (2-4 AD). However, he did not rule for long, as he later fell victim to a conspiracy organized by the Armenian nobility. At Augustus’s behest, Ariobarzanes’s son, Artavasdes IV (4-6 AD), was proclaimed king of Armenia, but he too became a victim of a conspiracy.

This time, Augustus sent his new candidate for the Armenian throne, Tigran V, the grandson of the king of Israel, who was related to the Artaxiad dynasty through his mother. This “new Armenian king” reigned for only a few months before being overthrown due to an Armenian uprising.

Resisting Rome’s practice of appointing Armenian kings, the Armenians placed Tigran IV’s sister, Erato (6-12 AD), on the throne, and later the former king of Parthia, Vonones I (12-16 AD). Neither Erato nor Vonones were recognized by Rome.

In 18 AD, with the consent of the Armenians, the Pontic prince Zeno was crowned king of Greater Armenia (18-34 AD) by Germanicus, the nephew of Emperor Tiberius, in Artashat. The new king was very popular among the Armenian nobility, as he had grown up and been educated in an Armenian environment, thus not only mastering the Armenian language and traditions but also pursuing policies based on Armenia’s state interests.

It is no coincidence that the Armenians gave him the dynastic name Artashes. As the Roman historian Tacitus eloquently put it, “As soon as the crown was placed on Zeno’s head, the crowd, honoring him, began to greet him as Artashes.” Zeno-Artashes was the only Armenian king not overthrown by the Armenians and who died a natural death.

After Zeno-Artashes, Rome gave the Armenian crown to the Iberian prince Mithridates of Iberia (35-37 AD). His reign in Armenia was marked by a powerful anti-Roman uprising led by the sparapet Gisak Dimaksyan, thanks to whom Mithridates was expelled, and the country fully restored its independence by 43 AD.

The prolonged and heroic struggle of the Armenian people against Rome, their love of freedom, was reflected in the precise allegory of the notable Roman poet Virgil: “Araxes, intolerant of bridges,” meaning Armenia, intolerant of foreign domination.

However, Rome continued the same policy. After the reign of Sanatruk I, Mithridates was reappointed king of Armenia with Rome’s consent. In 51 AD, the Armenian throne was seized by his nephew Radamistus, who had previously killed his uncle and his entire family.

Tacitus brilliantly depicted the principles of Rome’s policy in dependent countries, particularly in Armenia: “All external crimes should be welcomed, seeds of hatred should be sown, as Roman emperors often distributed Armenia under the pretext of generosity to barbarians to stir their souls. Let Radamistus rule… only let him be hated, disgraced, because it is more beneficial than if he were gloriously expelled from Armenia…”

Such harsh realities forced the Armenians to seek an alternative alliance, and it was at this time that Parthia began to regain its former power. Armenia stood on the brink of a crucial choice – Rome or Parthia.

Artatsolum