The flaws in Horenaci's “Histories”
The work of M. Horenaci has, however, two flaws. He is very ‘patriotic’ at some places. According to J. Flavius, for example, the Parthian-Armenian campaign to the south was led by the Parthian satrap Barzapran who handed the power to Antigon and took Hyrcan to Babylon. In contrast, according to M. Horenaci Tigran II was the initiator of the campaign, the army was Armeno-Parthian and was led by the nakharar Barzapran Rshuni. This feature does not obstruct our analysis however.
Another fault of M. Horenaci is his tendency to group more significant events around the distinguished kings of the Armenian history. As a rule this happens when the correspondent kings have the same names and when this grouping does not go beyond the chronological limits of the broad historical episodes (macroses) described by him in separate chapters if his work. This characteristics of Horenaci's narrative was noted also by G. Sarkisjan. Horenaci allows himself to represent a multidute of facts as a single fact from a single source if only the facts are consistent and supplement each other [24]. This type of deformation is most frequently found for the period from I c. BC to I c. AD, in the personages from Tigran II the Great (95-55 BC) up to Trdat I (58-59, 62-107 AD).
[Previous] [Next]
[Back to Index]