Hunara: Journal of Ancient Iranian Arts and History

Abstract One of the most intriguing episodes in the history of ancient Armenia and Achaemenid Persia is associated with Arakha, son of H/Ḫaldita, who seized control of Babylon and proclaimed himself king under the name Nebuchadnezzar IV. Unfortunately, our only primary source regarding Arakha’s revolt is the Behistun inscription, which has resulted in various scholarly interpretations―many of which lack coherence or, at times, even contradict the information provided by the primary sources. This article proposes a new hypothesis concerning Arakha’s identity, which will be examined in correlation with other source-based references.

Abstract The Achaemenid period plays a uniquely important role in the millennia-long history of Armenian-Iranian relations. During the two hundred years of Persian rule, Armenia played a significant role in the Achaemenid state’s governance system, and apart from the rebellion against Darius I in 522-521 BC, there are no other historical records of Armenian uprisings against Persia.
According to accounts by Movses Khorenatsi and Thovma Artsruni, Armenians and Persians maintained allied relations in the 6^th century BC, working together to free themselves from Median domination. Medieval Armenian historians speak highly of the friendly relationship between Cyrus the Great and Tigran Haykazn. Thovma Artsruni notes that Armenian auxiliary forces actively participated in the Persian army’s wars against the Medes, Lydians, and Babylonians.
Remarkably, both Tigran Haykazn and Cyrus the Great are portrayed by Movses Khorenatsi and Thovma Artsruni as wise rulers, guided by wisdom and, in some ways, connected to Ahura Mazda. The comparison of the relationship between Tigran and Cyrus suggests that, in ancient times, Armenians and Persians were not seen as opposing forces, and the Persians did not assert dominance over the Armenians. In the “we” vs. “them” dichotomy, Armenians were positioned in the “we” category alongside the Medes and Persians, while those living farther away were seen as “them”.

Abstract The history of Armenia during the destruction of the Achaemenid Kingdom is fragmentarily presented in extant sources, which do not allow forming a complete picture of the history of Armenia. In this regard, Arrian’s account of the 2nd century AD refers to the participation of Armenians in the Battle of Gaugamela, which took place in 331 BC. This data has sparked controversy in Armenology, and it is not an isolated exception. The mention of Armenian involvement in the Battle of Gaugamela is important in the sense that after two hundred years of Achaemenid rule, Armenia regained its independence and conducted independent politics in international relations. The Arrian’s account is also important in identifying Orontes and Mithraustes, who led the Armenians.