Papers by David Chikovani
საერთაშორისო კონფერენცია არქივთმცოდნეობა, წყაროთმცოდნეობა - ტენდენციები და გამოწვევები, 2023
Simeon of Beth Arsham was a Syrian bishop at the beginning of the sixth century. From ca. 500
She... more Simeon of Beth Arsham was a Syrian bishop at the beginning of the sixth century. From ca. 500
Shemʿun was active in opposing the spread of dyophysitism in Persia, in the Byzantine Empire and in
Armenia. As a „brave warrior on behalf of the true faith“, he often engaged in public debates of high
visibility, by which he gained the title „Persian debater“ (dorušo parsoyo).
At the beginning of the sixth century, he traveled to Armenia. Simeon took to Persia a written
confession of faith of Armenians, Georgians and Albanians. In his letter, which is called „On Barṣawma
bshop of Nisibis and the heresy of the Nestorians“, Simeon writes about the Christology of the Kartli
Church. In Georgian historiography, it is considered that, according to Simeon of Beth Arsham, the
Kartli church received Zeno's henoticon at the beginning of the sixth century.
The results of the research completely change the views on the Christology of the Kartli Church. The
article analyzes the letter of Simeon of Beth Arsham and concludes that, according to Simeon, the Kartli
Church adopted not the Henoticon, but the Miaphysite Christology.
Medieval Studies, 2024
The dating of the reign of Vakhtang Gorgasali is one of the problematic issues in historiography.... more The dating of the reign of Vakhtang Gorgasali is one of the problematic issues in historiography.
Armenian chronicler Ghazar P’arpec’i has the most important information about the reign of
Vakhtang Gorgasali, according to which “Vakhtang killed the impious bdeshx Vazgen in the twentyfifth
year of king Peroz”. Differences of opinion are caused by the date from which the author
calculated Peroz’s reign and, accordingly, when the Vakhtang’s rebellion began. Since Peroz actually
became king in 459, some scholars date the rebellion to 483 or 484. But since the rebellion lasted
for more than 2 years and then Peroz died in 484, the dating of the beginning of the rebellion in 483
or 484 is unacceptable.
Nikoloz Janashia made an alternative explanation for this. When Peroz’s father Yazdegerd II
(r. 438–457) died in 457, Civil war soon followed; Yazdegerd II’s eldest son Hormizd III declared
himself king at the city of Ray in northern Iran, while Peroz fled to the northeastern part of the
empire and began raising an army in order to claim the throne for himself. Peroz was aided by his
Mihranid tutor Raham Mihran, who in 459 captured and executed Hormizd, and then crowned
Peroz as shahanshah. According to N. Janashia, the date of Peroz’s accession to the throne is more
likely to have upset Ghazar P’arpec’i than the course of the rebellion. Therefore, he dated the
rebellion to 482 years.
The dating of the rebellion was done by Karen Yuzbashian, who studied the course of the
rebellion in detail and concluded that the rebellion lasted less than 3 years. And since it ended with
the death of Peroz in 484, he pointed to 482 as the date of the beginning of the rebellion.
Dating the beginning of the rebellion through the duration of the rebellion was not convincing
for Manana Sanadze, who noted that Vakhtang Gorgasali rebelled not in 482, but in 484. Manana
Sanadze believes that Vakhtang Gorgasali lived in 471-531.
According to German orientalist and scholar Theodor Nöldeke, the coins of King Peroz show
that Peroz clearly wanted to end the previous two years in which he was only a pretender to the
throne.
To determine where Peroz’s rule in Sasanian Iran was counted, we searched for documents
written in Sasanian Iran. Such a document is the act of the Council of Seleucia in 497, in which it
is written: “We also admit, but only on this point, the assembly which took place in the country
of Beit Houzaye, in the city of Beit Laphat, in the 27th year of Peroz, King of Kings”. The Synod of
Beit Laphat was held in April 484, Apparently, the reign of Peroz is counted from 457 year in this
document.
According to the Persians who came to Armenia in 506, “unanimously, our country rigorously
maintained this faith and not the slightest defilement was openly manifested until the twenty seventh year of the reign of Peroz”. It is clear that these Persians counted the reign of Peroz from
457.
In a letter concerning the heresy of the Nestorians and Barsauma, Syrian bishop Simeon of
Beth Arsham, who lived in Sasanian Persia, writes: “… they made various congregations among the
Persians, first in Beth Lapat, the metropolitan city of the Huzites – this happened in the twentyseventh
year of Peroz, king of kings… all the Persians held (this faith) until the twenty-seventh
year when the bishops of the Persians transgressed the anathema of all the bishops… Thus, we
separated ourselves from communion with the Nestorians from the twenty-seventh year of King
Peroz until today”. It is clear that Simeon of Beth Arsham counted Peroz’s reign from 457.
It is written in the act of the Synod of Mar Gregory in 605: “We will also recall that the divine
assembly which took place in Beit Houzaye, in the city of Beit Laphat, in the month of Nisan in
the 27th year of Peroz, King of kings, whose leaders and main characters were the blessed Mar
Bar sauma , metropolitan bishop of Nisibis, and Nanai, metropolitan bishop of Pherat”. In this
document, the reign of Peroz is counted from 457.
From the sources we have verified, it is clear that Peroz’s reign in Sasanian Iran was not counted
from 459, when he actually became king, but from 457, when Yezdigerd II died. Thus, no mistake
was made by Ghazar P’arpec’i regarding the date of the beginning of the rebellion. The 25th year of
Peroz’s reign, when Vakhtang Gorgasali killed Vazgen, was 481/482.
Thus, there is no reason to doubt the truth of the story of Ghazar P’arpec’i. From his history it
is clear that in 482-484 Vakhtang Gorgasali was the king of Kartli and fought against the Persians.
Therefore, it is a mistake to date his life to 471-531.
THE NEAR EAST AND GEORGIA, 2024
In 226, after the defeat of the Parthian king Artabanus IV, the Sasanian dynasty took power in Ir... more In 226, after the defeat of the Parthian king Artabanus IV, the Sasanian dynasty took power in Iran. At the time of Shāpūr I (reigned 241–272), the empire stretched from Sogdiana and Iberia (Georgia) in the north to the Mazun region of Arabia in the south and extended to the Indus River in the east and to the upper Tigris and Euphrates river valleys in the west.
After the conquest of new territories, the Sasanians faced a new goal - Iranization of the conquered territories, in which the spread and establishment of Zoroastrianism had to play an important role. The Sasanians began to fulfill this goal, but at first, they were reluctant to take radical measures because Zoroastrianism was not popular in the
conquered territories, and it was not profitable for them to stir up religious strife.
The religious tolerance of the first Sasanians towards the religious groups living in the empire, as well as the emigration of many Christians from the conquered territories to Iran, further increased the number of Christians. At the end of the third century, Christians even managed to consecrate a bishop in Seleucia-Ctesiphon, the capital of the empire.
The situation changed after the Sassanids were defeated in the war of 296-299 and had to cede northern Mesopotamia and the protectorate over Armenia and Iberia to Rome. Soon, Rome, under the leadership of Constantine the Great (306-337), began to patronize
Christians and turned this religion into a tool of influence on neighboring states. It was in this situation that the countries of the South Caucasus, Armenia, Kartli, and Albania became Christian, thus clearly confirming their connection with the Roman Empire. The Sasanians, for whom the South Caucasus had great strategic importance, could not adapt to the religious-ideological unity of the states of this region and the Roman
Empire, which prevented the final dominance of Iran in the South Caucasus. Shapur II (309- 379), who was going to return the lost territories according to the treaty of Nisibis, considered the Christians living in Iran to be the "fifth column" and, therefore, after the start of the war with Rome (337/8 AD), he began to persecute Christians in Iran.
In the 60s and 70s of the 4th century, Shapur II managed to subdue the kingdom of Armenia and Iberia, where, although he and his successors could not eradicate Christianity, they tried their best to spread Zoroastrianism. At the same time, the churches of these
states were forced to break the hierarchical connection with the churches of the Roman Empire, and then they actively began to interfere in the affairs of these churches, they appointed the highest hierarchs and forbade them to perform the liturgy in Greek.
Soon, the Sasanian kings realized that the persecution of Christians did not bring results and changed their attitude towards them. Yazdegerd I (399-420) decided to unite the Christians living in Iran in one church, and with his promotion in 410, the Church of the East was founded, which was ruled by the bishop of the capital, Seleucia-Ctesiphon, who received the title of Catholicos of the East. Yazdegerd himself appointed the Eastern Catholicos and interfered in the affairs of the church. During the reign of Yazdegerd, between 410 and 420, the jurisdiction of the Church
of the East was extended over the churches of Armenia, Iberia, and Albania, which were subordinated to the Catholicos of the East. For Yazdegerd, the Church of the East became a tool to control the Christians living in Iran and subjugate the states of the South Caucasus,
while he did not stop trying to spread Zoroastrianism in these states.
გორის სახელმწიფო სასწავლო უნივერსიტეტის შრომათა კრებული, 2023
სტატიაში განხილულია დასავლეთ "აბაზგის ეპარქიის" ადგილმდებარეობისა და მისი იერარქიული დაქვემდებარე... more სტატიაში განხილულია დასავლეთ "აბაზგის ეპარქიის" ადგილმდებარეობისა და მისი იერარქიული დაქვემდებარების საკითხი კონსტანტინოპოლის პატრიარქისადმი
ქართული წყაროთმცოდნეობა, 2023
სტატია ეხება დამასკოს ეპისკოპოს ელია იბნ 'უბაიდის "არაბულ ნომოკანონში" ჰულვანის მიტროპოლიტს დაქვე... more სტატია ეხება დამასკოს ეპისკოპოს ელია იბნ 'უბაიდის "არაბულ ნომოკანონში" ჰულვანის მიტროპოლიტს დაქვემდებარებული أسقف الكرج - "ალ-ქრჯის ეპისკოპოსის" იდენტიფიკაციას. რომელიც ქართულ ისტორიოგრაფიაში "ქართველთა ეპისკოპოსად" იყო მიჩნეული.
სტატიაში განხილულია 497 წელს სასანიანთა ირანის დედაქალაქში გამართული საეკლესიო კრება და მისი ზეგა... more სტატიაში განხილულია 497 წელს სასანიანთა ირანის დედაქალაქში გამართული საეკლესიო კრება და მისი ზეგავლენა ქართლის ეკლესიაზე
ლაზარ ფარპეცის "სომხეთის ისტორია" და მისი მნიშვნელობა ვახტანგ გორგასლის მეფობის დათარიღებისთვის
ვახტანგ გორგასლის მეფობის დათარიღება ერთ-ერთი პრობლემური საკითხია ისტორიოგრაფიაში. ამ საკითხის გა... more ვახტანგ გორგასლის მეფობის დათარიღება ერთ-ერთი პრობლემური საკითხია ისტორიოგრაფიაში. ამ საკითხის გამოსარკვევად უმნიშვნელოვანეს ცნობას გვაწვდის ვახტანგ გორგასლის თანამედროვე სომეხი ავტორი ლაზარ ფარპეცი, რომელიც წერს: "ვახტანგმა მოკლა უშჯულო ბდეშხი ვაზგენი პეროზის მეფობის 25-ე წელს". ისტორიოგრაფიაში აზრთა სხვადასხვაობას იწვევს პეროზის მეფობის ათვლის საკითხი. ამის გამორკვევა მით უფრო მნიშვნელოვანია, ვინაიდან "შუშანიკის წამებასა" და ბოლნისის სიონის სააღმშენებლო წარწერაშიც იგივე სათარიღო სისტემაა გამოყენებული.
სტატიაში განხილულია ვახტანგ გორგასლის მეფობის ქრონოლოგიის შესახებ ბოლო დროს გამოთქმული მოსაზრებებ... more სტატიაში განხილულია ვახტანგ გორგასლის მეფობის ქრონოლოგიის შესახებ ბოლო დროს გამოთქმული მოსაზრებები, ასევე ვახტანგის ანტისპარსული აჯანყების დათარიღებისთვის მოტანილია ახალი წყაროები
მოამბე, 1899
სტატია წარმოადგენს 1899 წელს მოსე ჯანაშვილის მიერ ვახტანგ გორგასლის მეფობის ახლებურ დათარიღებას. ... more სტატია წარმოადგენს 1899 წელს მოსე ჯანაშვილის მიერ ვახტანგ გორგასლის მეფობის ახლებურ დათარიღებას. რომელსაც დღეს რიგი ისტორიკოსები თავისად აცხადებენ.
სტატიაში განხილულია სამურზაყანოში მიმდინარე საეკლესიო პროცესები I საუკუნიდან თანამედროვე ეპოქამდე... more სტატიაში განხილულია სამურზაყანოში მიმდინარე საეკლესიო პროცესები I საუკუნიდან თანამედროვე ეპოქამდე, განსაკუთრებული ყურადღება გამახვილებულია რუსეთის საეკლესიო პოლიტიკაზე სამურზაყანოში
სტატიაში განხილულია ვახტანგ გორგასლის მოღვაწეობის დათარიღების შესახებ ქართულ ისტორიოგრაფიაში გამო... more სტატიაში განხილულია ვახტანგ გორგასლის მოღვაწეობის დათარიღების შესახებ ქართულ ისტორიოგრაფიაში გამოთქმული მოსაზრებები
სტატიაში განხილულია ირანის სასანიანი შაჰების რელიგიური პოლიტიკა ირანსა და სამხრეთ კავკასიის ქვეყნ... more სტატიაში განხილულია ირანის სასანიანი შაჰების რელიგიური პოლიტიკა ირანსა და სამხრეთ კავკასიის ქვეყნებში.
აღმოსავლეთის ეკლესიის კრებათა ისტორია IV-V საუკუნეებში (კრებთა აქტები და სხვა მასალები), 2019
ნიზიბინის ეპისკოპოსი ბარსუმა V საუკუნის მეორე ნახევრის სპარსეთის ეკლესიის ისტორიის ერთ-ერთი უმნი... more ნიზიბინის ეპისკოპოსი ბარსუმა V საუკუნის მეორე ნახევრის სპარსეთის ეკლესიის ისტორიის ერთ-ერთი უმნიშვნელოვანესი ფიგურაა. ედესის სკოლის ყოფილმა მოსწავლემ მისი დახურვის შემდეგ სასანიანთა ირანს შეაფარა თავი, სადაც ნიზიბინის უმნიშვნელოვანესი სამიტროპოლიტო ჩაიგდო ხელთ. მისი მეთაურობით სპარსეთის ეკლესიის ეპისკოპოსთა ნაწილი დაუპირისპირდა კათოლიკოს ბაბოვაის (457-484). განდგომილმა ეპისკოპოსებმა 484 წლის აპრილში ბეთ ლაპატში მოწვეულ კრებაზე ჯერ ანათემას გადასცეს კათოლიკოსი, შემდეგ კი, ბარსუმას ხრიკების წყალობით, შაჰ პეროზმა (459-484) სიკვდილით დასაჯა კათოლიკოსი ბაბოვაი. წლების განვალობაში პეროზის რელიგიური პოლიტიკის დასაყრდენი სწორედ ბარსუმა ნიზიბინელი იყო, რომელსაც, როგორც ჩანს, დიდი გავლენა ჰქონდა სასანიან შაჰზე. ბარსუმა ნიზიბინელის წერილები სწორედ კათოლიკოს ბაბოვაის სიკვდილის შემდეგ არის დაწერილი და წარმოაჩენს სასანიანთა ირანში არსებულ რელიგიურ და პოლიტიკურ მდგომარეობას.
აღმოსავლეთის ეკლესიის კრებათა ისტორია IV-V საუკუნეებში, 2019
315 წელს სასანიანთა ირანის დედაქალაქში, სელევკია-ქტეზიფონში, გაიმართა იმპერიის ეპისკოპოსების საეკ... more 315 წელს სასანიანთა ირანის დედაქალაქში, სელევკია-ქტეზიფონში, გაიმართა იმპერიის ეპისკოპოსების საეკლესიო კრება, რომელზედაც განიხილეს დედაქალაქის ეპისკოპოს პაპას საქმეები და დაამხეს იგი. მოცემული ფრაგმენტი ვრცლად ეხება სწორედ აღნიშნული კრების მიმდინარეობას.
ქართული წყაროთმცოდნეობა, 2019
Proceedings of National parliamentary library's fi rst young humanitarian conference, 2019
PRO GEORGIA JOURNAL OF KARTVELOLOGICAL STUDIES, 2021
Georgian Souce-Studies, 2017
Up to now, many opinions have been suggested about the time of torture and torturer of the prince... more Up to now, many opinions have been suggested about the time of torture and torturer of the princes of Argveti, David and Constantine. The scientists were especially surprised that Arabian commander was mentioned as "the nephew of apostle Muhammad" in the text of "Martyrdom", because it was known that Muhammad had no sisters or nephews. In the article it is clear that "David and Constantine’s Martyrdom" is not the only text that refers to Muhammad's nephew. Armenian sources “History of Saint Nerses the Parthian” and John Mamikonean's „History of Taron“provides information about the Arabian commander's invasion to Armenia, Kartli and Javakheti in 636-639 and the Arab commander is referred to as "Mahmet's sister's son". The Georgian and Armenian sources have a common understanding that Mohammed's nephew’s invasion was the first Arab invasion in Armenia and Kartli. One of the list of Georgian Martyrdom, as well as the Armenian source, indicates the date of Arab invasion in 639.
From the article it is clear that both Georgia and Armenia have aninformation about the invasion of Mohammed's nephew in the South Caucasus.
Drafts by David Chikovani
სტატია ეხება რწმენის სიმბოლოში "Filioques" არსებობის ერთ-ერთ ადრეულ დადასტურებას, რომელიც ქართული... more სტატია ეხება რწმენის სიმბოლოში "Filioques" არსებობის ერთ-ერთ ადრეულ დადასტურებას, რომელიც ქართული ისტორიოგრაფიისთვის უცნობია.
სტატიაში განხილულია ფილოსოფოს თემისტიოსის (317-დაახლ. 388) ერთი ცნობა, რომელიც რომაელი სარდლების ... more სტატიაში განხილულია ფილოსოფოს თემისტიოსის (317-დაახლ. 388) ერთი ცნობა, რომელიც რომაელი სარდლების ქართლის სამეფოში აქტივობას შეეხება.
Uploads
Papers by David Chikovani
Shemʿun was active in opposing the spread of dyophysitism in Persia, in the Byzantine Empire and in
Armenia. As a „brave warrior on behalf of the true faith“, he often engaged in public debates of high
visibility, by which he gained the title „Persian debater“ (dorušo parsoyo).
At the beginning of the sixth century, he traveled to Armenia. Simeon took to Persia a written
confession of faith of Armenians, Georgians and Albanians. In his letter, which is called „On Barṣawma
bshop of Nisibis and the heresy of the Nestorians“, Simeon writes about the Christology of the Kartli
Church. In Georgian historiography, it is considered that, according to Simeon of Beth Arsham, the
Kartli church received Zeno's henoticon at the beginning of the sixth century.
The results of the research completely change the views on the Christology of the Kartli Church. The
article analyzes the letter of Simeon of Beth Arsham and concludes that, according to Simeon, the Kartli
Church adopted not the Henoticon, but the Miaphysite Christology.
Armenian chronicler Ghazar P’arpec’i has the most important information about the reign of
Vakhtang Gorgasali, according to which “Vakhtang killed the impious bdeshx Vazgen in the twentyfifth
year of king Peroz”. Differences of opinion are caused by the date from which the author
calculated Peroz’s reign and, accordingly, when the Vakhtang’s rebellion began. Since Peroz actually
became king in 459, some scholars date the rebellion to 483 or 484. But since the rebellion lasted
for more than 2 years and then Peroz died in 484, the dating of the beginning of the rebellion in 483
or 484 is unacceptable.
Nikoloz Janashia made an alternative explanation for this. When Peroz’s father Yazdegerd II
(r. 438–457) died in 457, Civil war soon followed; Yazdegerd II’s eldest son Hormizd III declared
himself king at the city of Ray in northern Iran, while Peroz fled to the northeastern part of the
empire and began raising an army in order to claim the throne for himself. Peroz was aided by his
Mihranid tutor Raham Mihran, who in 459 captured and executed Hormizd, and then crowned
Peroz as shahanshah. According to N. Janashia, the date of Peroz’s accession to the throne is more
likely to have upset Ghazar P’arpec’i than the course of the rebellion. Therefore, he dated the
rebellion to 482 years.
The dating of the rebellion was done by Karen Yuzbashian, who studied the course of the
rebellion in detail and concluded that the rebellion lasted less than 3 years. And since it ended with
the death of Peroz in 484, he pointed to 482 as the date of the beginning of the rebellion.
Dating the beginning of the rebellion through the duration of the rebellion was not convincing
for Manana Sanadze, who noted that Vakhtang Gorgasali rebelled not in 482, but in 484. Manana
Sanadze believes that Vakhtang Gorgasali lived in 471-531.
According to German orientalist and scholar Theodor Nöldeke, the coins of King Peroz show
that Peroz clearly wanted to end the previous two years in which he was only a pretender to the
throne.
To determine where Peroz’s rule in Sasanian Iran was counted, we searched for documents
written in Sasanian Iran. Such a document is the act of the Council of Seleucia in 497, in which it
is written: “We also admit, but only on this point, the assembly which took place in the country
of Beit Houzaye, in the city of Beit Laphat, in the 27th year of Peroz, King of Kings”. The Synod of
Beit Laphat was held in April 484, Apparently, the reign of Peroz is counted from 457 year in this
document.
According to the Persians who came to Armenia in 506, “unanimously, our country rigorously
maintained this faith and not the slightest defilement was openly manifested until the twenty seventh year of the reign of Peroz”. It is clear that these Persians counted the reign of Peroz from
457.
In a letter concerning the heresy of the Nestorians and Barsauma, Syrian bishop Simeon of
Beth Arsham, who lived in Sasanian Persia, writes: “… they made various congregations among the
Persians, first in Beth Lapat, the metropolitan city of the Huzites – this happened in the twentyseventh
year of Peroz, king of kings… all the Persians held (this faith) until the twenty-seventh
year when the bishops of the Persians transgressed the anathema of all the bishops… Thus, we
separated ourselves from communion with the Nestorians from the twenty-seventh year of King
Peroz until today”. It is clear that Simeon of Beth Arsham counted Peroz’s reign from 457.
It is written in the act of the Synod of Mar Gregory in 605: “We will also recall that the divine
assembly which took place in Beit Houzaye, in the city of Beit Laphat, in the month of Nisan in
the 27th year of Peroz, King of kings, whose leaders and main characters were the blessed Mar
Bar sauma , metropolitan bishop of Nisibis, and Nanai, metropolitan bishop of Pherat”. In this
document, the reign of Peroz is counted from 457.
From the sources we have verified, it is clear that Peroz’s reign in Sasanian Iran was not counted
from 459, when he actually became king, but from 457, when Yezdigerd II died. Thus, no mistake
was made by Ghazar P’arpec’i regarding the date of the beginning of the rebellion. The 25th year of
Peroz’s reign, when Vakhtang Gorgasali killed Vazgen, was 481/482.
Thus, there is no reason to doubt the truth of the story of Ghazar P’arpec’i. From his history it
is clear that in 482-484 Vakhtang Gorgasali was the king of Kartli and fought against the Persians.
Therefore, it is a mistake to date his life to 471-531.
After the conquest of new territories, the Sasanians faced a new goal - Iranization of the conquered territories, in which the spread and establishment of Zoroastrianism had to play an important role. The Sasanians began to fulfill this goal, but at first, they were reluctant to take radical measures because Zoroastrianism was not popular in the
conquered territories, and it was not profitable for them to stir up religious strife.
The religious tolerance of the first Sasanians towards the religious groups living in the empire, as well as the emigration of many Christians from the conquered territories to Iran, further increased the number of Christians. At the end of the third century, Christians even managed to consecrate a bishop in Seleucia-Ctesiphon, the capital of the empire.
The situation changed after the Sassanids were defeated in the war of 296-299 and had to cede northern Mesopotamia and the protectorate over Armenia and Iberia to Rome. Soon, Rome, under the leadership of Constantine the Great (306-337), began to patronize
Christians and turned this religion into a tool of influence on neighboring states. It was in this situation that the countries of the South Caucasus, Armenia, Kartli, and Albania became Christian, thus clearly confirming their connection with the Roman Empire. The Sasanians, for whom the South Caucasus had great strategic importance, could not adapt to the religious-ideological unity of the states of this region and the Roman
Empire, which prevented the final dominance of Iran in the South Caucasus. Shapur II (309- 379), who was going to return the lost territories according to the treaty of Nisibis, considered the Christians living in Iran to be the "fifth column" and, therefore, after the start of the war with Rome (337/8 AD), he began to persecute Christians in Iran.
In the 60s and 70s of the 4th century, Shapur II managed to subdue the kingdom of Armenia and Iberia, where, although he and his successors could not eradicate Christianity, they tried their best to spread Zoroastrianism. At the same time, the churches of these
states were forced to break the hierarchical connection with the churches of the Roman Empire, and then they actively began to interfere in the affairs of these churches, they appointed the highest hierarchs and forbade them to perform the liturgy in Greek.
Soon, the Sasanian kings realized that the persecution of Christians did not bring results and changed their attitude towards them. Yazdegerd I (399-420) decided to unite the Christians living in Iran in one church, and with his promotion in 410, the Church of the East was founded, which was ruled by the bishop of the capital, Seleucia-Ctesiphon, who received the title of Catholicos of the East. Yazdegerd himself appointed the Eastern Catholicos and interfered in the affairs of the church. During the reign of Yazdegerd, between 410 and 420, the jurisdiction of the Church
of the East was extended over the churches of Armenia, Iberia, and Albania, which were subordinated to the Catholicos of the East. For Yazdegerd, the Church of the East became a tool to control the Christians living in Iran and subjugate the states of the South Caucasus,
while he did not stop trying to spread Zoroastrianism in these states.
From the article it is clear that both Georgia and Armenia have aninformation about the invasion of Mohammed's nephew in the South Caucasus.
Drafts by David Chikovani
Shemʿun was active in opposing the spread of dyophysitism in Persia, in the Byzantine Empire and in
Armenia. As a „brave warrior on behalf of the true faith“, he often engaged in public debates of high
visibility, by which he gained the title „Persian debater“ (dorušo parsoyo).
At the beginning of the sixth century, he traveled to Armenia. Simeon took to Persia a written
confession of faith of Armenians, Georgians and Albanians. In his letter, which is called „On Barṣawma
bshop of Nisibis and the heresy of the Nestorians“, Simeon writes about the Christology of the Kartli
Church. In Georgian historiography, it is considered that, according to Simeon of Beth Arsham, the
Kartli church received Zeno's henoticon at the beginning of the sixth century.
The results of the research completely change the views on the Christology of the Kartli Church. The
article analyzes the letter of Simeon of Beth Arsham and concludes that, according to Simeon, the Kartli
Church adopted not the Henoticon, but the Miaphysite Christology.
Armenian chronicler Ghazar P’arpec’i has the most important information about the reign of
Vakhtang Gorgasali, according to which “Vakhtang killed the impious bdeshx Vazgen in the twentyfifth
year of king Peroz”. Differences of opinion are caused by the date from which the author
calculated Peroz’s reign and, accordingly, when the Vakhtang’s rebellion began. Since Peroz actually
became king in 459, some scholars date the rebellion to 483 or 484. But since the rebellion lasted
for more than 2 years and then Peroz died in 484, the dating of the beginning of the rebellion in 483
or 484 is unacceptable.
Nikoloz Janashia made an alternative explanation for this. When Peroz’s father Yazdegerd II
(r. 438–457) died in 457, Civil war soon followed; Yazdegerd II’s eldest son Hormizd III declared
himself king at the city of Ray in northern Iran, while Peroz fled to the northeastern part of the
empire and began raising an army in order to claim the throne for himself. Peroz was aided by his
Mihranid tutor Raham Mihran, who in 459 captured and executed Hormizd, and then crowned
Peroz as shahanshah. According to N. Janashia, the date of Peroz’s accession to the throne is more
likely to have upset Ghazar P’arpec’i than the course of the rebellion. Therefore, he dated the
rebellion to 482 years.
The dating of the rebellion was done by Karen Yuzbashian, who studied the course of the
rebellion in detail and concluded that the rebellion lasted less than 3 years. And since it ended with
the death of Peroz in 484, he pointed to 482 as the date of the beginning of the rebellion.
Dating the beginning of the rebellion through the duration of the rebellion was not convincing
for Manana Sanadze, who noted that Vakhtang Gorgasali rebelled not in 482, but in 484. Manana
Sanadze believes that Vakhtang Gorgasali lived in 471-531.
According to German orientalist and scholar Theodor Nöldeke, the coins of King Peroz show
that Peroz clearly wanted to end the previous two years in which he was only a pretender to the
throne.
To determine where Peroz’s rule in Sasanian Iran was counted, we searched for documents
written in Sasanian Iran. Such a document is the act of the Council of Seleucia in 497, in which it
is written: “We also admit, but only on this point, the assembly which took place in the country
of Beit Houzaye, in the city of Beit Laphat, in the 27th year of Peroz, King of Kings”. The Synod of
Beit Laphat was held in April 484, Apparently, the reign of Peroz is counted from 457 year in this
document.
According to the Persians who came to Armenia in 506, “unanimously, our country rigorously
maintained this faith and not the slightest defilement was openly manifested until the twenty seventh year of the reign of Peroz”. It is clear that these Persians counted the reign of Peroz from
457.
In a letter concerning the heresy of the Nestorians and Barsauma, Syrian bishop Simeon of
Beth Arsham, who lived in Sasanian Persia, writes: “… they made various congregations among the
Persians, first in Beth Lapat, the metropolitan city of the Huzites – this happened in the twentyseventh
year of Peroz, king of kings… all the Persians held (this faith) until the twenty-seventh
year when the bishops of the Persians transgressed the anathema of all the bishops… Thus, we
separated ourselves from communion with the Nestorians from the twenty-seventh year of King
Peroz until today”. It is clear that Simeon of Beth Arsham counted Peroz’s reign from 457.
It is written in the act of the Synod of Mar Gregory in 605: “We will also recall that the divine
assembly which took place in Beit Houzaye, in the city of Beit Laphat, in the month of Nisan in
the 27th year of Peroz, King of kings, whose leaders and main characters were the blessed Mar
Bar sauma , metropolitan bishop of Nisibis, and Nanai, metropolitan bishop of Pherat”. In this
document, the reign of Peroz is counted from 457.
From the sources we have verified, it is clear that Peroz’s reign in Sasanian Iran was not counted
from 459, when he actually became king, but from 457, when Yezdigerd II died. Thus, no mistake
was made by Ghazar P’arpec’i regarding the date of the beginning of the rebellion. The 25th year of
Peroz’s reign, when Vakhtang Gorgasali killed Vazgen, was 481/482.
Thus, there is no reason to doubt the truth of the story of Ghazar P’arpec’i. From his history it
is clear that in 482-484 Vakhtang Gorgasali was the king of Kartli and fought against the Persians.
Therefore, it is a mistake to date his life to 471-531.
After the conquest of new territories, the Sasanians faced a new goal - Iranization of the conquered territories, in which the spread and establishment of Zoroastrianism had to play an important role. The Sasanians began to fulfill this goal, but at first, they were reluctant to take radical measures because Zoroastrianism was not popular in the
conquered territories, and it was not profitable for them to stir up religious strife.
The religious tolerance of the first Sasanians towards the religious groups living in the empire, as well as the emigration of many Christians from the conquered territories to Iran, further increased the number of Christians. At the end of the third century, Christians even managed to consecrate a bishop in Seleucia-Ctesiphon, the capital of the empire.
The situation changed after the Sassanids were defeated in the war of 296-299 and had to cede northern Mesopotamia and the protectorate over Armenia and Iberia to Rome. Soon, Rome, under the leadership of Constantine the Great (306-337), began to patronize
Christians and turned this religion into a tool of influence on neighboring states. It was in this situation that the countries of the South Caucasus, Armenia, Kartli, and Albania became Christian, thus clearly confirming their connection with the Roman Empire. The Sasanians, for whom the South Caucasus had great strategic importance, could not adapt to the religious-ideological unity of the states of this region and the Roman
Empire, which prevented the final dominance of Iran in the South Caucasus. Shapur II (309- 379), who was going to return the lost territories according to the treaty of Nisibis, considered the Christians living in Iran to be the "fifth column" and, therefore, after the start of the war with Rome (337/8 AD), he began to persecute Christians in Iran.
In the 60s and 70s of the 4th century, Shapur II managed to subdue the kingdom of Armenia and Iberia, where, although he and his successors could not eradicate Christianity, they tried their best to spread Zoroastrianism. At the same time, the churches of these
states were forced to break the hierarchical connection with the churches of the Roman Empire, and then they actively began to interfere in the affairs of these churches, they appointed the highest hierarchs and forbade them to perform the liturgy in Greek.
Soon, the Sasanian kings realized that the persecution of Christians did not bring results and changed their attitude towards them. Yazdegerd I (399-420) decided to unite the Christians living in Iran in one church, and with his promotion in 410, the Church of the East was founded, which was ruled by the bishop of the capital, Seleucia-Ctesiphon, who received the title of Catholicos of the East. Yazdegerd himself appointed the Eastern Catholicos and interfered in the affairs of the church. During the reign of Yazdegerd, between 410 and 420, the jurisdiction of the Church
of the East was extended over the churches of Armenia, Iberia, and Albania, which were subordinated to the Catholicos of the East. For Yazdegerd, the Church of the East became a tool to control the Christians living in Iran and subjugate the states of the South Caucasus,
while he did not stop trying to spread Zoroastrianism in these states.
From the article it is clear that both Georgia and Armenia have aninformation about the invasion of Mohammed's nephew in the South Caucasus.
according to which the bishoprics of western Georgia were not subject to the Patriarchate of
Constantinople. And based on proper sources it has been shown that this opinion is not correct.
today; the obvious confirmation of it is lots of literature devoted to
the research of Church of East during the last time; the most distinguishable is the fact that points of view on the initial lawful situation of
Church of East (its autocephaly) and Christology are changed during
the last decades.
Against this background, researching of the history of Church of
East in Georgia is extremely reverent, where it isn’t the subject of research yet and Church of East or generally references about it are presented just in several books or articles, which are based on the Western
Historiography and don’t refer to the initial sources. Besides, they don’t
represent the news existed in modern researches of Church of East.
We think a research of the history of Church of East is extremely
important for researching of the church history generally and for research of the political and ecclesiastical history of Georgia, because
since formation as an united organization (410), Church of East was
bounded to the churches of the countries of Transcaucasia, and within ten years, for 420 direct entered in its composition. Besides, Kartli
Church and Church of East have common fortune – church of Antioch
had pretension over both of them. It’s distinguishable that this claim
towards the both churches is represented in one and the same source.
Though as it is already established, Church of East had never been subject to Antioch. Foreseeing this fact, presence of representative of Kartli Church at the synod as of 420 and subordination of Kartli Church by
the Catholicos of the East is too important; because of the fact, claims
of the Church of Antioch towards Church of Kartli is under doubt. It’s
noteworthy that “Catholicos” is established as a title just in Church of
East and it doesn’t have a synod of title in Western Churches at early
stage. We think establishment of the title of the “Catholicos” in Church
of Kartli is connected to the subordination to the Church of East and
hereinafter to the obtaining of autocephaly.
Foreseeing the all above-said, our goal was to show sources on
Church of East and considerations about them in the historiography,
and use this information for studying the history of Church of Kartli.
For this purpose, we tried to gather together all these components in
this book. We took only the texts on the synods of Church of East of
the 5th century from Oriental Synodikon, which are enclosed by other
sources about these synods. Besides, we put materials about two synods of the 4th century, the minutes of which aren’t given in Oriental
Synodikon. The main text is set up according to the publishing of J. B.
202
Chabot. Onomastikon named in the texts is compared with the Syrian
text; we also used publishing by O. Braun, different reading of which is
enclosed to the thesis as an enclosure.
Opinions of the searchers are enclosed to the texts, reader to be able
to acquaint with the explanation of this or that text. We preferred to
put the explanation of the toponyms in scholium instead of putting at
the end of the thesis (as J. B. Chabot makes) to be easier for the reader
to elucidate to that geographic environment about which is talked in
the text in parallel.
We suppose this thesis will help to the persons interested in as Oriental as generally history of Christian Church, political history of Sasanian Persia and history of Church of Kartli