Beate Dignas & Engelbert Winter - Kaveh Farrokh

26 Armenia 177
him, who once more adopted the demeanor of a suppliant, on his right. Because
of this he was hailed as imperator, and after laying a laurel wreath in the Capitol
he closed the double doors of the temple of Janus, indicating that no war was left
anywhere. 16
In the year 54 the Parthian king Vologaeses I (51–76/80) had appointed his
brother Tiridates (52/54–60 and 61/66–72) as king of Armenia. This move
had threatened Roman interests and triggered war with Rome. Although
the Romans mobilised a large army in order to deal with the ‘Armenian
conflict’, a solution was reached only through a mutual agreement that
led to the events described by Suetonius. Right after the last battle in
Armenia, which had taken place at Rhandeia, Tiridates had paid tribute
to Nero before the emperor’s image and taken off his diadem, which Nero
himself returned to him three years later as part of a solemn ceremony.
Suetonius depicts the events as a spectacle that illustrated Rome’s greatness
and superiority, a representation that matches his efforts to praise Nero as
a triumphant victor. What we do not immediately see, however, is that
after a series of unsuccessful military activities the Romans had to waive
their claims for direct rule in Armenia; this was compensated for by the
willingness of the king to acknowledge that henceforth any Armenian king
would be an official dependant of Rome. At least in the year 66 the solution
proved to be a successful reconciliation of interests, which had a stabilising
effect. By agreeing on such a partition of sovereignty over Armenia both
sides came to terms with the fact that neither could rule in Armenia without
respecting the interests of the other. Ultimately, however, Armenia remained
a Parthian vassal state because the Parthian kings did not allow the Romans
to prescribe who would be the Arsacid on the Armenian throne. While the
investiture of the Armenian king was reserved to the Roman emperors, the
actual choice lay with the Parthian king. 17
Armenian history after Tiridates I is not well documented. We can say,
however, that for the next 150 years the situation was more or less peaceful
and closely linked to the state of Roman–Parthian relations. 18 When
tensions between the great powers increased, this entailed turbulence for
Armenia. The following passage reveals how much the foundation of the
Sasanian Empire in the year 224 affected affairs within Armenia itself as
well as its role as a cause for conflict between West and East.
16 This was the customary symbolic act that indicated the end of war.
17 Chaumont 1987a: 424.
18 On the episodic character of Armenian history and the difficulties of ‘reconstructions’ see Garsoïan
1997a and 2004; see also Redgate 1998: 88–94.