Records Concerning the Hephthalites in Byzantine Historical Works

Yu Taishan

1. Priscus,[1]History[2]

[1] Priscus was born in Panion (in Thrace) between 410-420 CE. In 448/449 CE, he accompanied Maximinus, the head of the Byzantine embassy representing Emperor Theodosius the Younger (r. 408–450), on a diplomatic mission to the court of Attila the Hun. After an interlude in Rome, Priscus traveled to Alexandria and the Thebaid in Egypt. He last appeared in the East, c. 456, attached to the staff of Euphemios as Emperor Marcian’s (r. 450–457)таgistеr оffiсiоrит.He died after 472 CE.

[2]Histоrу:Priscus was the author ofHistоrу(orHistоrу оf Вуzапtiит, Gоthiс Histоrу) an historical work in eight volumes written in Greek, covering probably the period from the accession of Attila the Hun to the accession of Emperor Zeno (r. 474–475), or from 433 up until 474 CE. Priscus’ work currently survives in fragments and was very influential in the Byzantine Empire.

1.1 [Fr. 33.1 (Excerpta de Legationibus, Rom. 8)]

1.1.1 The Romans went to Colchis[3], made war on the Lazi[4], and then the Roman army returned home. The Emperor’s advisers prepared for a second campaign and deliberated whether in pursuing the war they should travel by the same route or through the part of Armenia close to Persian territory, having first sent an embassy to win over the monarch of the Parthians. For it was considered wholly impracticable to take the sea route along the rugged coast, since Colchis had no harbor, Gobazes[5]himself sent envoys to the Parthians and also to the Romans. Since the monarch of the Parthians[6]was involved in a war with the so-called Kidarite Huns[7], he ejected the Lazi who were fleeing to him.①Blockley1983, p. 337.[8]

[3] Colchis, a region in the Southern Caucasus, was located on the eastern coast of the Black Sea,centered on present-day western Georgia.

[4] Lazi, i.e. Lazica, was the name given to the territory of Colchis during the Roman period, from about the 1st century BCE.

[5] Gobazes was the king of Lazica.

[6] The monarch of the Parthians refers to Pērōz I(r. 459- 484), the emperor of the Sassanian Empire and the son of Yazdgird II.

[7] Kidarite Huns: Since Kidāra, the king of the Kidarite Kushans, was forced by the “Xiongnu”to move west, they would not have used “Huns” in their ethnonym. Thus, the Kιδαρίτας Oὔννoυς can simply be regarded as “the Huns who came from the regions under the Kidarites”, who were simply the Hephthalites.②Cf. YuT2001.

[8] The diplomatic activity between the Romans and the Persians, Vandals, and Huns, respectively,took place in 464-465.③Blockley1981, p. 121.

1.2 [Fr. 41.1 (Excerpta de Legationibus, Gent. 15)]

1.2.1 ... It also said that the Romans, through a contribution of money, should show interest in the fortress of Iouroeipaach, situated at the Caspian Gates[9], or they should at least send soldiers to guard it. It was not right that the Persians alone should be burdened by the expense and the garrisoning of the place, since if they did not make these expenditures, the neighbouring peoples would easily inflict damage not only upon the Persians but upon the Romans also. They further said that the Romans should help with money in the war against the so-called Kidarite Huns, since a Persian victory would be advantageous to the Romans insofar as that people would be prevented from penetrating to the Roman Empire also. The Romans replied that they would send someone to discuss all these issues with the Parthian monarch. They claimed that there were no fugitives amongst them and that the Magi were not harassed on account of their religion, and said that since the Persians had undertaken the guarding of the fortress of Iouroeipaach and the war against the Huns on their own behalf, it was not right that they demand money from the Romans...①Blockley1983, p. 347.

[9]Caspian Gates: An ancient toponym identifying a ground-level pass that runs east and west through a southern spur of the Alborz Mountains in north of central Iran.

1.3 [Fr. 41.3 (Excerpta de Legationibus, Rom. 12)]

1.3.1 When Constantius[10]the envoy had waited for a while at Edessa[11], as I have said,[12]for the sake of his embassy, the Persian monarch gave him admittance to his territory.He asked Constantius to come to him while he was engaged not in the cities but on the borders between his people and the Kidarite Huns. With these a war had begun, the cause of which was that the Huns were not receiving the tribute monies which the former rulers of the Persians and the Parthians[13]had paid. The father of the monarch had refused the payment of the tribute and had undertaken the war, which his son had inherited together with the kingdom. As a result the Persians were being worn down by the fighting and wished to end the dispute with the Huns by guile. So Perozes[14](for this was the name of the current Persian king) sent to Kungchas (Koύγχαν)[15], the leader of the Huns, saying that he welcomed peace with him and wished to make a treaty of alliance and betroth his sister to him, for he happened to be very young and not yet the father of children. However, when Kunchas had accepted these proposals, he married not the sister of Perozes but another woman dressed as a princess, whom the Persian king had sent, having told her that if she did not reveal the trick she would enjoy royal status and affluence, but if she told of the deceit she would suffer death as the penalty, since the ruler of the Kidarites would not endure to have a maidservant to write instead of a noblewoman.②Blockley1983, p. 349.

[10] Constantius, the name which appears here and in the following passage, is an error (apparently Priscan) for Constantinus.③Blockley1983, p. 396.

[11] Edessa was an ancient town in upper Mesopotamia.

[12] This suggests that Priscus interrupted his account of Constantius’ embassy with other material,perhaps other diplomatic activity or the account of the fire at Constantinople.④Blockley1983, p. 395.

[13] Parthians here refers to the Sassanians.

[14] Perozes (Pērōz I): the emperor of the Sassanian Empire and the son of Yazdgird II, who reigned from 459 to 484.

[15] Kunchas(Koύγχς), theKhапof the Huns, the name was also read Koυνχαν. “Koυνχας”, which appears after some lines, is because the ν of Koύνχαν was changed in the accusative case. In the nominative case it should be Koυνχαν. Koυνχας was thus a textual error.①Haussig1953, esp. p.353.It is suggested that Koύγχςor Koυνχαν should refer to Qun-Xan (HunKhап), because the Kushāns did not adopt the title ofKhап, so it was misinterpreted and said to have been a result of the Rouran’s influence.②Uchida1959.In my opinion, this theory is unacceptable. Those who adopted the title ofKhапshould be the Hephthalites. The Hephthalites originated in the north of China, where the nomadic tribes, such as the Xianbei and so on, all adopted the title ofKhап.③YuT1986, pp.80-82.

1.3.2 Having made the treaty on these terms, Perozes did not long profit from his treachery towards the ruler of the Huns. For the woman, fearing that at some time the ruler of the people would be told of her status by others and would put her to a cruel death, revealed what had been done. Kunchas praised the woman for her honesty and continued to keep her as his wife. But, wishing to punish Perozes for his trick, he pretended that he was at war with his neighbours and had need, not of fighting men (for he had an enormous number of these), but of generals to direct the war. Perozes sent him three hundred of his leading captains, and of these the ruler of the Kidarites killed some and mutilated the rest, sending them back to Perozes with the message that this was the punishment for his treachery. Thus the war between them was rekindled, and there was heavy fighting. Therefore, Perozes received Constantius in Gorga[16], which was the name of the place at which the Persians were encamped, and having treated him generously for a few days, dismissed him without a satisfactory reply to the embassy.④Blockley1983, p.349.[17]

[16] Gorga was located in the valley of the present-day Gorgan River, to the south-east of the Caspian Sea.⑤YuT1986, pp.76-84.

[17] It is suggested that Priscus tells how Perozes, the Persian king, having promised his sister to Kunchas, the ruler of the Kidarites, sent in her stead a maidservant. When the trick was discovered,Kunchas repaid treachery in kind and the war flared up. The story has a kernel of fact, for the war is historical and a proposal of marriage is plausible since the Persians and Kidarites may have had dynastic ties. But the details of the causation are false and drawn from Herodotus (3, 1), where Amasis, the king of Egypt, sends a substitute for his daughter to Cambyses, the Persian king, a deception which also leads to war. In all of these three cases Priscus was dealing with events well beyond the Roman frontier and of which little but the barest outline is likely to have been known to him. As a result, though he was dealing with a historical reality, his lack of information led him to flesh out what he had with details drawn from the Herodotean accounts of equally exotic lands.①Blockley1981, pp.54-55.

1.4 [Fr. 47 (Excerpta de Legationibus, Gent. 19)]

The Saraguri[18], having attacked the Akatiri[19]and other peoples, invaded Persia. First they came to the Caspian Gates, but when they found that the Persians had established a fort there, they took another route, by which they came to Iberia[20]. They laid waste this country and overran Armenia. As a result the Persians, apprehensive of this inroad on top of their old war with the Kidarites, sent an embassy to the Romans and asked that they give them either money or men for the defence of the fortress of Iouroeipaach. They repeated what had often been said by their embassies, that since they were facing the fighting and refusing to allow access to the attacking peoples, the Romans’ territory remained unravaged. When the Romans replied that each had to fight for his own land and take care of his own defence, they again returned having achieved nothing.②Blockley1983, p.355.

[18]Saraguri, seems to be a Turkic nomadic tribes, and have been beyond the Danube.

[19] For the attack upon the Akatiri (Huns), cf. PriscusFr. 40.1 (Ехс. dе Lеg. Gent. 14).③Blockley1983, p.345.The Persian embassy noted in the present passage seems to have been another, later one than that remarked in PriscusFr. 41.1 (Ехс. dе Lеg. Gent. 15).④Blockley1983, p.397.

[20]Iberia is the present-day Şanlıurfa, Turkey.

1.5 [Fr. 51.1 (Excerpta de Legationibus, Gent. 22)]

1.5.1 When the Romans had replied that they would send help and a man to command it,[21]an embassy arrived from the Persians which announced that they had crushed the Kidarite Huns and had taken their city of Balaam[22]. They reported their victory and in barbaric fashion boasted about it, since they wished to advertise the very large force which they had at present.①Blockley1983, p.361.[23]

[21] The Suani (a nation under suzerainty of the Lazi) had captured some forts from the Sassanians and the Suani sent an embassy to Constantinople to ask the Romans for help but the Suani dismissed the reinforcements sent by the Romans due to the Sassanian forces being diverted from the conflict. When the Persians returned again, the Suani again called upon the Romans.

[22] Balaam was located in present-day Türkmenbaşy, to the south-east of the Caspian Sea.

[23] The Persian kings often had difficulty in raising and maintaining strong forces, since they did not have the large centralized military establishment of the Romans. Thus, when they had a large army, they tended to wish to use it.②Blockley1983, p.398.

2. Procopius[24], History of the Wars[25]

[24] Procopius or Procopius of Caesarea (с. 500–565 CE) was a prominent scholar from Palaestina Prima in late antiquity. Accompanying the Roman general Belisarius in the wars of the Emperor Justinian,he became the principal historian of the 6th century, writingHistоrу оf thе Wаrs, thе Виildiпgs оf Jиstiпiапand the celebrated (and infamous)Sесrеt Histоrу.He is commonly held to be the last major historian of the ancient Western world.

[25]Histоrу оf thе Wаrsis Procopius’ most important work. The first two books (often known as thePеrsiап Wаr) deal with the conflicts between the Romans and Sassanid Persia in Mesopotamia, Syria,Armenia, Lazica and Caucasian Iberia.

2.1 [I, iii]

2.1.1 At a later time the Persian King Perozes became involved in a war concerning boundaries with the nation of the Ephthalitae Huns[26], who are called White Huns[27], gathered an imposing army, and marched against them. The Ephthalitae are of the stock of the Huns in fact as well as in name; however they do not mingle with, any of the Huns known to us,for they occupy a land neither adjoining nor even very near to them; but their territory lies immediately to the north of Persia; indeed their city, called Gorgo[28], is located over against the Persian frontier, and is consequently the centre of frequent contests concerning boundary lines between the two peoples. For they are not nomads like the other Hunnic peoples, but for a long period have been established in a goodly land. As a result of this they have never made any incursion into the Roman territory except in company with the Median army.They are the only ones among the Huns who have white bodies and countenances which are not ugly.It is also true that their manner of living is unlike that of their kinsmen, nor do they live a savage life as they do; but they are ruled by one king, and since they possess a lawful constitution, they observe right and justice in their dealings both with one another and with their neighbours, in no degree less than the Romans and the Persians. Moreover, the wealthy citizens are in the habit of, attaching to themselves friends to the number of twenty or more,as the case may be, and these become permanently their banquet-companions, and have a share in all their property, enjoying some kind of common right in this matter. Then, when the man who has gathered such a company together comes to die, it is the custom that all these men be borne alive into the tomb with him.①Dewing1914, pp.13-15.

[26] The Ephthalitae Huns: “Huns”was preceded by “Ephthalitae” in order to distinguish them from other Huns.

[27] The White Huns: The Hephthalites were recorded as having “white bodies”, and if the Hephthalites were not like this originally,②According to my studies, there were profound links between the Hephthalites and Xianbei. The Xianbei were originally called “White Savages”. Cf. YuT2001.then surely this would have been the result of intermarriage with the indigenous population. As mentioned above, the Hephthalites practiced marriage outside the clan.

[28] Gorgo, i.e., Gorga. See no. 16.

2.1.2 Perozes, marching against these Ephthalitae, was accompanied, by an ambassador,Eusebius by name, who, as it happened, had been sent to his court by the Emperor Zeno[29],Now the Ephthalitae made it appear to their enemy that they had turned to flight because they were wholly terrified by their attack, and they retired with all speed to a place which was shut in on every side by precipitous mountains, and abundantly screened by a close forest of widespreading trees. Now as one advanced between the mountains to a great distance, a broad way appeared in the valley, extending apparently to an indefinite distance, but at the end it had no outlet at all, but terminated in the very midst of the circle of mountains. So Perozes,with no thought at all of treachery, and forgetting that he was marching in a hostile country,continued the pursuit without the least caution. A small body of the Huns were in flight before him, while the greater part of their force, by concealing themselves in the rough country, got in the rear of the hostile army; but as yet they desired not to be seen by them, in order that they might advance well into the trap and get as far as possible in among the mountains, and thus be no longer able to turn back. When the Medes[30]began to realize all this (for they now began to have a glimmering of their peril), though they refrained from speaking of the situation themselves through fear of Perozes, yet they earnestly entreated Eusebius to urge upon the king, who was completely ignorant of his own plight, that he should take counsel rather than make an untimely display of daring, and consider well whether there was any way of safety open to them. So he went before Perozes, but by no means revealed the calamity which was upon them; instead he began with a fable, telling how a lion once happened upon a goat bound down and bleating on a mound of no very great height, and how the lion, bent upon making a feast of the goat, rushed forward with intent to seize it, but fell into a trench exceedingly deep, in which was a circular path, narrow and endless (for it had no outlet anywhere), which indeed the owners of the goat had constructed for this very purpose, and they had placed the goat above it to be a bait for the lion. When Perozes heard this, a fear came over him lest perchance the Medes had brought harm upon themselves by their pursuit of the enemy. He therefore advanced no further, but, remaining where he was, began to consider the situation. By this time the Huns were following him without any concealment,and were guarding the entrance of the place in order that their enemy might no longer be able to withdraw to the rear. Then at last the Persians saw clearly in what straits they were,and they felt that the situation was desperate; for they had no hope that they would ever escape from the peril. Then the king of the Ephthalitae sent some of his followers to Perozes;he upbraided him at length for his senseless foolhardiness, by which he had wantonly destroyed both himself and the Persian people, but he announced that even so the Huns would grant them deliverance, if Perozes should consent to prostrate himself before him as having proved himself master, and, taking the oaths traditional among the Persians, should give pledges that they would never again take the field against the nation of the Ephthalitae.When Perozes heard this, he held a consultation with the Magi[31]who were present and enquired of them whether he must comply with the terms dictated by the enemy. The Magi replied that, as to the oath, he should settle the matter according to his own pleasure; as for the rest, however, he should circumvent his energy by craft. And they reminded him that it was the custom among the Persians to prostrate themselves before the rising sun each day;he should, therefore, watch the time closely and meet the leader of the Ephthalitae at dawn,and then, turning toward the rising sun, make his obeisance.[32]In this way, they explained, he would be able in the future to escape the ignominy of the deed. Perozes accordingly gave the pledges concerning the peace, and prostrated himself before his foe exactly as the Magi had suggested, and so, with the whole Median army intact, gladly retired homeward.①Dewing1914, pp.15-21.

[29] Zeno: Byzantine Emperor from 474 to 475 and again from 476 to 491 CE.

[30] Medes, i.e., the people of Media.

[31]Magi: reference to the Zoroastrian priest.

[32] This was custom of Zoroastrianism believed by the ancient Persians.

2.2 [I, iv]

2.2.1 Not long after this, disregarding the oath he had sworn he was eager to avenge himself upon the Huns for the insult done him. He therefore straightway gathered together from the whole land all the Persians and their allies, and led them against the Ephthalitae;of all his sons he left behind him only one, Cabades[33]by name, who, as it happened, was just past the age of boyhood; all the others, about thirty in number, he took with him. The Ephthalitae, upon learning of his invasion, were aggrieved at the deception they had suffered at the hands of their enemy, and bitterly reproached their king as having abandoned them to the Medes. He, with a laugh, enquired of them what in the world of theirs he had abandoned,whether their land or their arms or any other part of their possessions. They thereupon retorted that he had abandoned nothing, except, forsooth, the one opportunity on which, as it turned out, everything else depended. Now the Ephthalitae with all zeal demanded that they should go out to meet the invaders, but the king sought to restrain them at any rate for the moment. For he insisted that as yet they had received no definite information as to the invasion, for the Persians were still within their own boundaries. So, remaining where he was,he busied himself as follows. In the plain where the Persians were to make their irruption into the land of the Ephthalitae he marked off a tract of very great extent and made a deep trench of sufficient width; but in the centre he left a small portion of ground intact, enough to serve as a way for ten horses. Over the trench he placed reeds, and upon the reeds he scattered earth, thereby concealing the true surface. He then directed the forces of the Huns that, when the time came to retire inside the trench, they should draw themselves together into a narrow column and pass rather slowly across this neck of land, taking care that they should not fall into the ditch.[34]And he hung from the top of the royal banner the salt over which Perozes had once sworn the oath which he had disregarded in taking the field against the Huns. Now as long as he heard that the enemy were in their own territory, he remained at rest; but when he learned from his scouts that they had reached the city of Gorgo which lies on the extreme Persian frontier, and that departing thence they were now advancing against his army,remaining himself with the greater part of his troops inside the trench, he sent forward a small detachment with instructions to allow themselves to be seen at a distance by the enemy in the plain, and, when once they had been seen, to flee at full speed to the rear, keeping in mind his command concerning the trench as soon as they drew near to it. They did as directed,and, as they approached the trench, they drew themselves into a narrow column, and all passed over and joined the rest of the army. But the Persians, having no means of perceiving the stratagem, gave chase at full speed across a very level plain, possessed as they were by a spirit of fury against the enemy, and fell into the trench, every man of them, not alone the first but also those who followed in the rear. For since they entered into the pursuit with great fury, as I have said, they failed to notice the catastrophe which had befallen their leaders, but fell in on top of them with their horses and lances, so that, as was natural, they both destroyed them, and were themselves no less involved in ruin. Among them were Perozes and all his sons. And just as he was about to fall into this pit, they say that he realized the danger, and seized and threw from him the pearl which hung from his right ear—a gem of wonderful whiteness and greatly prized on account of its extraordinary size—in order, no doubt, that no one might wear it after him; for it was a thing exceedingly beautiful to look upon, such as no king before him had possessed. This story, however, seems to me untrustworthy, because a man who found himself in such peril would have thought of nothing else; but I suppose that his ear was crushed in this disaster, and the pearl disappeared somewhere or other. This pearl the Roman Emperor then made every effort to buy from the Ephthalitae, but was utterly unsuccessful. For the barbarians were not able to find it although they sought it with great labour. However, they say that the Ephthalitae found it later and sold it to Cabades.①Dewing1914, pp.21-27.

[33]Cabades (Kavād I): The emperor of the Sassanian Empire and the son of Pērōz I, who reigned from 488 to 496, 498 to 531

[34] The trench crossed the plain in an approximately straight line. The army of the Ephthalitae was drawn up behind it, facing the advancing Persians, while a few of them went out beyond the trench to draw the attack of the Persians.①Dewing1914, p.23.

… …

2.2.2 Thus Perozes was destroyed and the whole Persian army with him. For the few who by chance did not fall into the ditch found themselves at the mercy of the enemy. As a result of this experience a law was established among the Persians that, while marching in hostile territory, they should never engage in any pursuit, even if it should happen that the enemy had been driven back by force. Thereupon those who had not marched with Perozes and had remained in their own land chose as their king Cabades, the youngest son of Perozes,who was then the only one surviving. At that time, then, the Persians became subject and tributary to the Ephthalitae, until Cabades had established his power most securely and no longer deemed it necessary to pay the annual tribute to them. And the time these barbarians ruled over the Persians was two years[35].②Dewing1914, p.31.

[35] “Two years”: This should be in the reign of Balās, son of Yazdgird II, which was from 484 to 488.To extort war reparations was a motivation for the Hephthalites waging war against the Persians.

2.3 [I, vi]

2.3.1 While Cabades was in the prison[36]he was cared for by his wife, who went in to him constantly and carried him supplies of food. Now the keeper of the prison began to make advances to her, for she was exceedingly beautiful to look upon. And when Cabades learned this from his wife, he bade her give herself over to the man to treat as he wished. In this way the keeper of the prison came to be familiar with the woman, and he conceived for her an extraordinary love, and as a result permitted her to go in to her husband just as she wished, and to depart from there again without interference from anyone. Now there was a Persian notable, Seoses by name, a devoted friend of Cabades, who was constantly in the neighbourhood of this prison, watching his opportunity, in the hope that he might in some way be able to effect his deliverance. And he sent word to Cabades through his wife that he was keeping horses and men in readiness not far from the prison, and he indicated to him a certain spot. Then one day as night drew near Cabades persuaded his wife to give him her own garment, and, dressing herself in his clothes, to sit instead of him in the prison where he usually sat. In this way, therefore, Cabades made his escape from the prison. For although the guards who were on duty saw him, they supposed that it was the woman, and therefore decided not to hinder or otherwise annoy him. At daybreak they saw in the cell the woman in her husband’s clothes, and were so completely deceived as to think that Cabades was there,and this belief prevailed during several days, until Cabades had advanced well on his way. As to the fate which befell the woman after the stratagem had come to light, and the manner in which they punished her, I am unable to speak with accuracy. For the Persian accounts do not agree with each other, and for this reason I omit the narration of them.①Dewing1914, pp.43-47.

[36] According to Procopius, “As time went on Cabades became more highhanded in the administration of the government, and introduced innovations intothe constitution, among which was a law which he promulgated providing that Persians should have communal intercourse with their women,a measure which by no means pleased the common people. Accordingly they rose against him, removed him from the throne, and kept him in prison in chains. They then chose Blases, the brother of Perozes, to be their king”. (I, v)②Dewing1914, pp.31-33.

2.3.2 Cabades, in company with Seoses, completely escaped detection, and reached the Ephthalitae Huns; there the king gave him his daughter in marriage, and then, since Cabades was now his son-in-law, he put under his command a very formidable army for a campaign against the Persians. This army the Persians were quite unwilling to encounter, and they made haste to flee in every direction. And when Cabades reached the territory where Gousanastades exercised his authority, he stated to some of his friends that he would appoint asсhапаrапgеs[37]the first man of the Persians who should on that day come into his presence and offer his services. But even as he said this, he repented his speech, for there came to his mind a law of the Persians which ordains that offices among the Persians shall not be conferred upon others than those to whom each particular honour belongs by right of birth.For he feared lest someone should come to him first who was not a kinsman of the presentсhапаrапgеs, and that he would be compelled to set aside the law in order to keep his word.Even as he was considering this matter, chance brought it about that, without dishonouring the law, he could still keep his word. For the first man who came to him happened to be Adergoudounbades, a young man who was a relative of Gousanastades and an especially capable warrior. He addressed Cabades as “Lordˮ, and was the first to do obeisance to him as king, and besought him to use him as a slave for any service whatever. So Cabades made his way into the royal palace without any trouble, and, taking Blases[38]destitute of defenders,he put out his eyes, using the method of blinding commonly employed by the Persians against malefactors, that is, either by heating olive oil and pouring it, while boiling fiercely,into the wide-open eyes, or by heating in the fire an iron needle, and with this pricking the eyeballs. Thereafter Blases was kept in confinement, haying ruled over the Persians two years. Gousanastades was put to death and Adergoudciunbades was established in his place in the office ofсhапаrапgеs, while Seoses was immediately proclaimed “аdrаstаdаrап sаlапеs,ˮ— a title designating the one set in authority over all magistrates and over the whole army. Seoses was the first and only man who held this office in Persia; for it was conferred on no one before or after that time. And the kingdom was strengthened by Cabades and guarded securely; for in shrewdness and activity he was surpassed by none.①Dewing1914, pp.47-49.

[37] “Chanaranges”: Commander of the Frontier Troops, a Persian term for “general”.

[38] Blases (Balāsh): According to Tabari, the emperor was Jāmāsb/Zāmāsb, sonof Fayrūz, who reigned from 496 to 498 or 499. However, according to Procopius, Zames (Zāmāsb) was a sonof Cabades,who was disqualified from succeeding his father.

2.4 [I, vii]

2.4.1 A little later Cabades was owing the king of the Ephthalitae a sum of money which he was not able to pay him, and he therefore requested the Roman emperor Anastasius[39]to lend him this money; Whereupon Anastasius conferred with some of his friends and enquired of them whether this should be done; and they, would not permit him to make the loan. For,as they pointed out, it was inexpedient to make more secure by means of their money the friendship between their enemies and the Ephthalitae; indeed it was better for the Romans to disturb their relations as much as possible. It was for this reason, and for no just cause, that Cabades decided to make an expedition against the Romans.[40]First he invaded the land of the Armenians,[41]moving with such rapidity as to anticipate the news of his coming, and,after plundering the greater part of it in a rapid campaign, he unexpectedly arrived at the city of Amida[42], which is situated in Mesopotamia, and, although the season was winter, he invested the town. Now the citizens of Amida had no soldiers at hand, seeing that it was a time of peace and prosperity, and in other respects were utterly unprepared; nevertheless they were quite unwilling to yield to the enemy, and showed an unexpected fortitude, in holding out against dangers and hardships.①Dewing1914, pp.49-51.

[39] Anastasius: Anastasius I, Byzantine Emperor (r. 491- 518). During his reign the Roman eastern frontier underwent extensive re-fortification, including the construction of Dara, a stronghold intended to counter the Persian fortress of Nisibis.

[40] In 502 CE.

[41] The land of the Armenians: Sassanian Persia at the time of its founding fought with Rome for control of Armenia, mainly because Armenia was a crossroads between the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea. The forces of the two countries were destined to ebb and flow, and control over Armenia also changed hands several times. However, as a result of the rise of the Hephthalitesto their east, the Sassanian Persians faced hostility on two fronts, east and west,and their policy towards Armenia was necessarily curbed by the Hephthalites.

[42] Amida was located on the border between Armenia and Mesopotamia.

2.4.2 Now there was among the Syrians a certain just man, Jacobus by name, who had trained himself with exactitude in matters pertaining to religion. This man had confined himself many years before in a place called Endielon[43], a day’s journey from Amida, in order that he might with more security devote himself to pious contemplation. The men of this place, assisting his purpose, had surrounded him with a kind of fencing, in which the stakes were not continuous, but set at intervals, so that those who approached could see and hold converse with him. And they had constructed for him a small roof over his head, sufficient to keep off the rain and snow. There this man had been sitting for a long time, never yielding either to heat or cold, and sustaining his life with certain seeds, which he was accustomed to eat, not indeed every day, but only at long intervals. Now, some of the Ephthalitae who were overrunning the country thereabout saw this Jacobus and with great eagerness drew their bows with intent to shoot at him. But the hands of every one of them became motionless and utterly unable to manage the bow. When this was noised about through the army and came to the ears of Cabades, he desired to see the thing with his own eyes; and when he saw it, both he and the Persians who were with him were seized with great astonishment, and he entreated Jacobus to forgive the barbarians their crime. And he forgave them with a word, and the men were released from their distress. Cabades then bade the man ask for whatever he wished,supposing that he would ask for a great sum of money, and he also added with youthful recklessness that he would be refused nothing by him. But he requested Cabades to grant to him all the men who during that war should come to him as fugitives. This request Cabades granted, and gave him a written pledge of his personal safety. And great numbers of men, as might be expected, came flocking to him from all sides and found safety there; for the deed became widely known. Thus, then, did these things take place.①Dewing1914, pp.51-53.

… …

[43] Endielon was located near Amida.

2.5 [I, viii]

2.5.3 Areobindus[44], when he ascertained that Cabades was coming upon them with his whole army, abandoned his camp, and, in company with all his men, turned to flight and retired on the run to Constantina[45]. And the enemy, coming up not long afterwards, captured the camp without a man in it and all the money it contained. From there they advanced swiftly against the other Roman army. Now the troops of Patricius[46]and Hypatius[47]had happened upon eight hundred Ephthalitae who were marching in advance of the Persian army, and they had killed practically all of them.[48]Then, since they had learned nothing of Cabades and the Persian army, supposing that they had won the victory, they began to conduct themselves with less caution. At any rate they had stacked their arms and were preparing themselves a lunch;for already the appropriate time of day was drawing near. Now a small stream flowed in this place and in it the Romans began to wash the pieces of meat which they were about to eat;some, too, distressed by the heat, were bathing themselves in the stream; and in consequence the brook flowed on with a muddy current. But while Cabades, learning what had befallen the Ephthalitae, was advancing against the enemy with all speed, he noticed that the water of the brook was disturbed, and divining what was going on, he came to the conclusion that his opponents were unprepared, and gave orders to charge upon them immediately at full speed. Straightway, then, they fell upon them feasting and unarmed. And the Romans did not withstand their onset, nor did they once think of resistance, but they began to flee as each one could; and some of them were captured and slain, while others climbed the hill which rises there and threw themselves down the cliff in panic and much confusion. And they say that not a man escaped from there; but Patricius and Hypatius had succeeded in getting away at the beginning of the onset. After this Cabades retired homeward with his whole army, since hostile Huns had made an invasion into his land, and with this people he waged a long war in the northerly portion of his realm.[49]...①Dewing1914, pp.65-67.

[44] Areobindus, General of the East of Byzantine troops. At that time the Emperor Anastasius I (r.491-518), upon learning that Amida was being besieged by the Persians, dispatched with all speed an army of sufficient strength.

[45] Constantina (Constantia), a town in northern Mesopotamia.

[46] Patricius, the commander of troops in Byzantium.

[47] Hypatius, the nephew of the Emperor Anastasius I.

[48] The eight hundred Ephthalitae whom the Byzantine troops had happened upon were probably a contingent of mercenary troops of the Persians.

[49] In 503 CE, Kavād I fought with Byzantium on the western front, and the Hephthalites seized the opportunity to invade Persia. Kavād I hurriedly turned back to accept the challenge and negotiated a peace with Byzantium. Hereafterthe warfare between the Hephthalites and Persians was for a time intermittent and stalemated.

2.6 [I, ix, 24]

2.6.1 Thus the Romans by giving the money recovered Amida two years after it had been captured by the enemy. And when they got into the city, their own negligence and the hardships under which the Persians had maintained themselves were discovered. For upon reckoning the amount of grain left there and the number of barbarians who had gone out,they found that rations for about seven days were left in the city, although Glones and his son had been for a long time doling out provisions to the Persians more sparingly than they were needed. For to the Romans who had remained with them in the city I have stated above, they had decided to dispense nothing at all from the time when their enemy began the siege; and so these men at first resorted to unaccustomed foods and laid hold on every forbidden thing,and at the last they even tasted each other’s blood. So the generals realized that they had been deceived by the barbarians, and they reproached the soldiers for their lack of self-control,because they had shown themselves wanting in obedience to them, when it was possible to capture as prisoners of war such a multitude of Persians and the son of Glones and the city itself, while they had in consequence attached to themselves signal disgrace by carrying Roman money to the enemy, and had taken Amida from the Persians by purchasing it with silver. After this the Persians, since their war with the Huns[50]kept dragging on, entered into a treaty with the Romans,[51]which was arranged by them for seven years, and was made by the Roman Celer[52]and the Persian Aspebedes[53]; both armies then retired homeward and remained at peace. Thus, then, as has been told, began the war of the Romans and the Persians, and to this end did it come. But I shall now turn to the narration of the events touching the Caspian Gates.①Dewing1914, pp.75-77.

[50]“Huns” here refers to the Hephthalites.

[51] The Persians entered into a treaty with Byzantium in 506 CE.

[52] Celer, commander of palace troops of Byzantium.

[53] Aspebedes, uncle of Kavād I.

2.7 [I, x,]

2.7.1 The Emperor Anastasius, after concluding the treaty with Cabades, built a city in a place called Daras[54], exceedingly strong and of real importance, bearing the name of the emperor himself. Now this place is distant from the city of Nisibis[55]one hundred stades[56]lacking two, and from the boundary line which divides the Romans from the Persians about twenty-eight. And the Persians, though eager to prevent the building, were quite unable to do so, being constrained by the war with the Huns[57]in which they were engaged. But as soon as Cabades brought this to an end, he sent to the Romans and accused them of having built a city hard by the Persian frontier, though this had been forbidden in the agreement previously made between the Medes and the Romans.[58]At that time, therefore, the Emperor Anastasius desired, partly by threats, and partly by emphasizing his friendship with him and by bribing him with no mean sum of money; to deceive him and to remove the accusation.①Dewing1914, pp.81.

[54] Daras, a town in Mesopotamia.

[55]Nisibis: A town in northern Mesopotamia, which was a major focus of military confrontations between the Roman and the Sassanian empires. It had been controlled by the Sassanian Persia,however its role was reversed to that of bridge head of Persian operations against Roman and Byzantine frontier defences.

[56] A stadium (plural stadiums or stadia): A measure of length equaling the length of 600 human feet.

[57] “Huns” refers to the Hephthalites.

[58] Cf. Procopius, I, ii.②Dewing1914, pp.9-13.

2.8 [II, i, 14]

2.8.1 But Chosroes[59], the King of the Persians, claimed that the treaty had been broken by Justinian[60], who had lately displayed great opposition to his house, in that he had attempted in time of peace to attach Alamoundaras to himself. For, as he said, Summus,who had recently gone to the Saracen[61]ostensibly to arrange matters, had hoodwinked him by promises of large sums of money on condition that he should join the Romans, and he brought forward a letter which, he alleged, the Emperor Justinian had written to Alamoundaras[62]concerning these things. He also declared that he had sent a letter to some of the Huns[63], in which he urged them to invade the land of the Persians and to do extensive damage to the country thereabout. This letter he asserted to have been put into his hands by the Huns themselves who had come before him. So then Chosroes, with these charges against the Romans, was purposing to break off the treaty. But as to whether he was speaking the truth in these matters, I am not able to say.③Dewing1914, pp.263-265.[64]

[59] Chosroes (Khusrau I): Emperor of the Sassanian Empire, son of Kavād I, reigned from 531 to 579.

[60] Justinian (I) was a Byzantine emperor from 527 to 565.

[61] Saracens were held to be experts at plundering, but not atstorming towns.

[62] Alamoundaras, sonof Saccice,king of the Saracens.

[63] “Huns” here refers to the Hephthalites.

[64] Cf. Procopius, I, xxii.①Dewing1914, pp.95-101.

2.9 [II, xvi, 3]

2.9.1 At this time Belisarius[65]had arrived in Mesopotamia and was gathering his army from every quarter, and he also kept sending men into the land of Persia to act as spies. And wishing himself to encounter the enemy there, if they should again make an incursion into the land of the Romans, he was organizing on the spot and equipping the soldiers, who were for the most part without either arms or armour, and in terror of the name of the Persians. Now the spies returned and declared that for the present there would be no invasion of the enemy;for Chosroes was occupied elsewhere with a war against the Huns[66]. And Belisarius, upon learning this, wished to invade the land of the enemy immediately with his whole army.②Dewing1914, pp.397-399.

[65] Belisarius (с. 505-565 CE) was a general of the Byzantine Empire. He was instrumental to Emperor Justinian’s ambitious project of re-conquering much of the Mediterranean territory of the former Western Roman Empire, which had been lost less than a century previously. Procopius was accompanying Belisarius in the wars of the Emperor Justinian.

[66] The “Huns” here refers to the Hephthalites Khusrau I, after ascending the throne, made a series of political, economic, and military reforms, resulting in the strengthening of the Sassanian Persia. Khusrau I, while fighting against Byzantium for hegemony over the Mediterranean, formed a matrimonial alliance with the Türks, in order to prevail jointly over the Hephthalites.

3. Agathias,[67]The Histories[68]

[67] Agathias or Agathias Scholasticus (c. 530-582/594 CE), of Myrina (Mysia), an Aeolian city in western Asia Minor (now in Turkey), was a Greekpoet and the principal historian during the reign of Justinian I (552-558 CE).

[68] Agathias’Histоriеsare a source of information about pre-Islamic Iran, providing—in summary form—“our earliest substantial evidence for the Khvadhaynamagh tradition”,①Cameron1969, esp.69.that later formed the basis of Ferdowsi’sShаhпатеand provided much of the Iranian material for al-Tabari’sHistоrу.

3.1 [IV, xxvii, 4]

3.1.1 Consequently he lost his life in an expedition against the Ephthalites not so much,I imagine, through the strength of his opponents as through his own recklessness. Though he should have taken all the necessary precautions and reconnaissance measures to safeguard his advance into enemy territory against ambush he fell straight into a trap, a series of carefully camouflaged pits and trenches that stretched over the plain for a very great distance. He perished there together with his army in the twenty-fourth year of his reign, outmanoeuvred by the Huns — an ignominious way of ending his life.[69]The Ephthalites are in fact a Hunnic people.②Frendo1975, p.130.

[69] For detail, see §1.2.1 in this paper.

3.2 [IV, xxviii, 3]

3.2.1 But it was not long before Kavad escaped either aided and abetted by his wife who chose to die for his sake as Procopius tells us or by some other means.[70]At any rate the fact remains that he did escape from prison to the land of the Ephthalites where he threw himself on the protection of their king.③Frendo1975, p.131.

[70] For detail, see §1.3.2 in this paper.

4. Maurice,[71]Strategikon[72]

[71] Maurice was a Byzantine Emperor (r. 582-602).

[72]TheStrаtеgikоп(orStrаtеgiсоп) is a manual of war traditionally regarded as written in the late 6th century and usually attributed to Maurice; it is moreover a practical manual.

4.1 [IV, iii. Ambushes from Both Sides]

4.1.1 Some commanders have dug a trench eight or ten feet deep, fifty or sixty wide, and extending a good distance. They covered this with light pieces of wood, with hay and earth,so it looked just like the ground around it, and there was no way you could tell the difference.The excavated earth was removed from the site, so that it would not look at all strange. At various places in the middle of the trench they left some solid crossings of firm ground,well marked and made known at the proper time to their own army. Near the trench on both sides they placed troops in ambush under cover where they could not be seen, and they drew up the rest before the trench. When battle was joined, the men drawn up before the trench simulated defeat, retiring safely hack over the solid sections known to them. The enemy began an unrestrained, impetuous pursuit and fell into the trench. Then the soldiers posted in ambush suddenly charged out, and the men who had feigned retreat turned back. Most of the enemy perished, some falling into the trench, others while fleeing in disorder because of the unexpected disaster. It was by this stratagem that the Nephthalites[73]defeated Peroz[74], King of the Persians.①Dennis1984, p.53.

[73] Nephthalites is simply Ephthalites (Hephthalites). Both were undoubtedly alternate renderings of the same name. Coincidentally, Chinese historical texts also translated Ephthal as “Nieda” 囐噠[ngian-dat],see the “Yiyu Zhuan” 異域傳ofZhоиshи周書 (ch. 50).

[74] The story of Peroz, see §1.2.1 in this paper.

5. Menander the Guardsman,[75]The History[76]

[75] Menander the Guardsman (or Menander Protector): Byzantinehistorian, was born in Constantinople in the middle of the 6th century CE. The little that is known of his life is contained in the account of himself quoted in the Suda.②A massive 10th century Byzantine encyclopedia of the ancient Mediterranean world.He at first took up the study of law, but abandoned it for a life of pleasure. When his fortunes were low, the patronage accorded to literature by the Emperor Maurice, at whose court he was a military officer (hence the epithet Protector, which denotes his military function),encouraged him to try writing history.

[76]Thе Histоrу: Menander took as his model Agathias who like him had been a jurist, and his history begins at the point where Agathias leaves off. It embraces the period from the arrival of the Kutrigurs①A nomadic tribe who flourished in the Pontic-Caspian steppe in the 6th century ce.in Thrace during the reign of Justinian in 558 down to the death of the emperor Tiberius in 582. Considerable fragments of the work are preserved in the Excerpts of Constantine Porphyrogenitus and in the Suda.

5.1 [Fr. 4.2. (Exc. de Sent. 3)]

5.1.1 When Silzibul[77], the leader of the Turks, learned of the flight of the Avars[78]and the damage they had caused to Turkish possessions at their departure, as is naturally the case with barbarians he declared boastfully that, “They are not birds that they can take to the sky to escape the swords of the Turks, nor are they fish that they can take to the water and hide in the depths of the sea; but they must travel the earth. When I have ended the war with the Ephthalites, I shall attack the Avars and they shall not escape my might”. It is said that with this boast Silzibul continued his war against the Ephthalites.②Blockley1985, pp.45-47.[79]

[77] Silzibul: Silzibul (or Sizabul) recorded by Menander and Sinjibū recorded by Dīnawarī are also generally acknowledged to be Shidianmi 室點密. This may be correct, because Sinjibū’s deeds were similar to those of Shidianmi, and Silzibuland Sinǧibū can be taken as different transcriptions of the same name;to both are attributed the same deeds,which accord with those of Stembis as recorded by Theophylact Simocatt. Shidianmi himself received orders from the Khan of Mugan 木杆, together with his son Datou 達頭, to lead his troops on a western expedition against the Hephthalites. He made an alliance with Khusrō I and destroyed the state of the Hephthalites before 558 CE, and divided the Hephthalites’territory along the middle of the Amu Darya. Then he defeated the Avars and the Ogurs, led troops to wipe out the remaining Hephthalites north of the Amu Darya, and pursued and eliminated the Ogurs who escaped west, i.e.,the Pseudo-Avars, in 562-567 CE.

[78] Avars: The story of the Avars (Abaroi, Avari, or Avares) is chiefly recorded in Byzantine historical sources, according to which the Türks defeated the Avars, a nomadic horse-riding tribe,in the middle of the sixth century. Of the Avar remnants, some fled to Taugast, others to Mucri. After that, the Türks defeated the Ogors, another nomadic horse-riding tribe. The remnants of the latter, who were also called Avars or Pseudo-Avarsin Byzantine texts having usurped the Avars’ name, fled west and sought refuge within the boundaries of the Byzantine Empire. They were the very Avars who petitioned Justinian I (r. 527-565 CE)for sanction to live in the west of present-day Hungary in 558. Their forces later steadily increased and they conquered the Gepids and the Lombards, defeated Sigibert (561-575CE), king of the Franks in 566, and controlled a vast area, which was centered about the valley of the Danube and extended to the Black Sea in east, to the Baltic Sea in north, and to the Elbe River in west. They were the biggest threat to Byzantium and the western Germanic peoples until they were conquered by Pepin the Younger (r.752-768CE) and Charlemagne (r.768-814CE) during the period from 790 to 796CE.

[79]In the middle of the sixth century, the Türks arose in North Asia. Their chief, Tumen 土門, defeated the Tiele 鐵勒on behalf of the Rouran 柔然, for which service Tumen requested to form a matrimonial alliance with the Rouran, but was insulted by the RouranKhап, A’nagui 阿那瓌(r. 520-552CE). Enraged, Tumen attacked and defeated A’nagui in 552 CE,whereupon A’nagui committed suicide. As a result of repeated defeats by the Türks, the Khanate of the Rouran underwent a complete collapse, with all its territories occupied by the Türks. Thus, the western border of the Türks came to adjoin the Hephthalites.Meanwhile,in the west, Khusrau I (r. 531-579 CE), after ascending the throne, made a series of political, economic, and military reforms, resulting in the strengthening of the Sassanian Persia. Khusrau I, while fighting against Byzantium for supremacy over the Mediterranean, formed a matrimonial alliance with the Türks, in order to prevail jointly over the Hephthalites. Between the end of the fifties and the beginning of the sixties of the sixth century, the joint forces of the Türks and the Persians launched a pincer attack against the Hephthalites, who suffered complete defeat and destruction. The Türks and the Persians divided the lands of the Hephthalites, with the Amu Darya as their border. It was achieved through cooperation between the Persians and the Türks, though both sides claimed the major role, which the present passage suggests Menander gave to the Türks.

5.2 [Fr. 6.1. (Exc. de Leg. Rom. 3)]

5.2.1 At the following meeting the Zikh[80]began to boast and exalt king Khosro[81],saying that he was invincible and adorned with many victories; that from the time when he had assumed the tiara, he had conquered about ten peoples and made them tributary; that he had destroyed the power of the Ephthalites and had defeated very many kings; that the barbarians there were in wonderment and awe of him; and that properly and rightly he was proclaimed king of kings.①Blockley1985, p.65.[82]

[80] Zikh, a Persian envoy.

[81] Khosro (Khusrau I): Emperor of the Sassanian Empire, son of Kavād I, reigned from 531 to 579.

[82] The Turkic view regarding who conquered the Ephthalites is different (cf.Fr. 10.1 = 5.3).Presumably “many kings” refers to the barons of the former Ephthalite territory who had given allegiance to the Persian king. Although the singling out of the Ephthalites, who were the Persians’ most formidable enemy after the Romans and had been recently destroyed, is understandable, this and the following claim probably betray a degree of apprehension about the Turks, which may well have brought the Persians to negotiations. In stressing the title King of Kings (βασιλεὺς βασιλέων = Shahanshah) the Zikh is not advancing any claim to supremacy over the Roman Emperor, whom the Persians calledqаisаr.①Blockley1985, pp.254-255.

5.3 [Fr. 10.1. (Exc. de Leg. Gent. 7)]

5.3.1 At the beginning of the fourth year[83]of Justin’s reign an embassy from the Turks came to Byzantium. As the power of the Turks increased, the Sogdians, who were earlier subjects of the Ephthalites and now of the Turks, asked their king to send an embassy to the Persians, to request that the Sogdians be allowed to travel there and sell raw silk to the Medes[84]. Sizabul[85]agreed and dispatched Sogdian envoys, whose leader was Maniakh[86].When they reached the king of the Persians, they asked that they be given permission to sell the raw silk there without any hindrance. The Persian king, who was not at all pleased by their request, being reluctant to grant free access from there to that area of Persia, put off his reply until the next day and kept postponing it. After a series of postponements, as the Sogdians were pressing insistently for a reply, Khosro summoned a council to discuss the matter. Katulph, the Ephthalite, who, because the king had raped his wife, had betrayed his own tribe to the Turks[87](and who in the meantime had left them and joined the Medes),advised the Persian king not to return the silk, but to buy it, paying the fair price for it, and to burn it in the fire before the very eyes of the envoys, so that he would not be held to have committed an injustice but that it would be clear that he did not wish to use raw silk from the Turks. So the silk was burned, and the Sogdians returned to their homeland not at all pleased with what had happened.②Blockley1985, pp.111-113.[88]

[83] I.e. late 568-early 569.

[84] On the overthrow of the Ephthalites see n. 5. “Medes” here refers to Persia.

[85] Sizabul, i.e., Silzibul.

[86] Maniakh is apparently a Turkic name.

[87] Katulph: It is suggested that the name should be Kάτoυλγoς = Turkic Kutlug (Fortunate).①Cahun1896, p.109.

[88] Menander appears to identify two fears on the part of the Persians: a fear of Turkic expansion southwards, and a desire to keep as much as possible the lucrative silk trade (through the southern routes),now the Ephthalites, the old middlemen on the northern route, had been eliminated.②Blockley1985, p.262.

5.3.2 When the Sogdians told Sizabul what had occurred, he himself sent another embassy to the Persians, since he wished to establish friendly relations between them and his own state. When this second Turkish embassy arrived, the king, after discussion with the Persian high officials and with Katulph, decided that because of the untrustworthy nature of the Scythians[89]it was completely against Persian interest to establish friendly relations with the Turks. At this he ordered that some of the envoys be poisoned, so that henceforth they would refuse to come there. The majority of the Turkish envoys, all but three or four, were murdered by a deadly poison mixed in with their food. A report was circulated amongst the Persians that the Turkish envoys had been killed by the stifling dryness of Persia, because their own land was often covered with snow and they could not survive away from cold weather. Although the survivors of the plot suspected a different explanation, when they returned to their own country they noised about the same version as the Persians. Sizabul,however, who was a shrewd and intelligent man, recognised what had been done and realised the truth, that the envoys had been killed by treachery. This was the cause of the hostility between the Persians and the Turks.③Blockley1985, pp.113-115.[90]

[89] Here “Scythians” is not used as a synonym for “Turks”, but refers in general to all the nomadic inhabitants of Scythia. The view that nomads were untrustworthy was shared with the Romans.④Blockley1985, p.262.

[90]After the alliance of the two states splintered, according to Menander, the Türks first sent envoys to Byzantium in 568 CE to conspire to attack the Persians, and attempted to open up atrade route directly with the West. The above-mentioned matters were learned by Zemarchus, the envoy of Byzantium, when he paid a return visit in the same year. According to Zemarchus’ report, he saw, with his own eyes, that Sizabul marched against the Persians. This was the prelude to hostility between the Türks and the Persians.①YuT1986, pp.103-113.

5.3.3 Maniakh, the leader of the Sogdians, took this opportunity and advised Sizabul that it would be better for the Turks to cultivate the friendship of the Romans and send their raw silk for sale to them because they made more use of it than other people. Maniakh said that he himself was very willing to go along with envoys from the Turks, and in his way the Romans and Turks would become friends. Sizabul consented to this proposal and sent Maniakh and some others as envoys to the Roman Emperor carrying greetings, a valuable gift of raw silk and a letter.[91](Look for the letter in theЕхсеrрts оп Lеttеrs.)②Blockley1985, p.115.

[91] Relations between the Romans and the Sogdians had perhaps opened about twenty years earlier,and, in fact, relations with Transcaucasia may have existed for much longer.③Hannestad1955-1957, esp. p.450.The Romans had already attempted to deprive the Persians of their income from silk by using the Ethiopians as middlemen, an attempt which failed. By the time of Maniakh’s embassy they had the silkworm, eggs of which had been smuggled during Justinian’s reign; and, indeed, Theophanes of Byzantium (Fr. 3) says that Justin showed such silk to the Turkic envoys, to their astonishment.④See §6.1.1.But an industry apparently did not develop.⑤Blockley1985, pp.262-263.

5.3.4 Carrying this letter Maniakh set out on his journey. He travelled very many roads and traversed very many lands, over huge mountains reaching near the clouds, through plains and woods, over marshes and rivers. Then he crossed the Caucasus and finally came to Byzantium.[92]When he entered the palace and came before the Emperor, he did everything according to the law of friendship. He handed over the letter and the gifts to those who were sent to receive them and he asked that the toil of his journey not be in vain.⑥Blockley1985, p.115.

[92] Theophanes (Сhrоп. A.M. 6064)⑦Mango1997 (2), pp.361-364.adds the detail that he travelled via the land of the Alans (to the north-east of the Caucasus).⑧Blockley1985, p.263.

5.3.5 When the Emperor read the letter, written in Scythian,[93]through an interpreter,he most willingly granted an audience to the embassy. He then questioned the envoys about the leadership of the Turks and their location. They replied that they had four principalities,but power over the whole people was vested in Sizabul alone.[94]Furthermore, they said, the Turks had conquered the Ephthalites and made them tributary.[95]“You have, therefore,” asked the Emperor, “made all the power of the Ephthalites subject to you?” “Completely,” replied the envoys. The Emperor then asked, “Do the Ephthalites live in cities or villages?” The envoys: “My Lord, that people lives in cities.”[96]“Then,” said the Emperor, “it is clear that you have become master of these cities.” “Indeed,” said the envoys. The Emperor asked, “Tell us how large a multitude of Avars revolted from Turkish rule and whether any remain subject to you.” “There are, O Emperor, some who still adhere to us. Those who fled number, I think,around twenty thousand.” Then the envoys enumerated the tribes subject to the Turks and asked the Emperor for peace and an offensive and defensive alliance between the Romans and the Turks. They added that they were also very willing to crush those enemies of the Roman state who were pressing upon their territory.[97]As they were speaking Maniakh and those with him raised their hands on high and swore upon their greatest oath that they were saying these things with honest intent. In addition they called down curses upon themselves,even upon Sizabul and upon their whole race, if their claims were false and could not be fulfilled. In this way the Turkish people became friends of the Romans and established these relations with our state.①Blockley1985, pp.115-117.

[93] Cahun suggests that the letter was in the old Turkish script and remarks that it is noteworthy that the Romans had a translator who could read it.②Cahun1896, p.112.However, Menander never clearly uses “Scythian”specifically of the Turks, and it would be remarkable if the Romans had such a person available. More likely “Scythian” is used in a loose way for the languages of Central Asia, so that the actual language cannot be identified; and perhaps Menander did not know what it was. One of the languages of the settled peoples, such as Sogdian, is more likely.③Blockley1985, p.263.

[94] That is, Sizabul was senior Khagan over the four groups that comprised the Western Turks.④Bury1897.

[95] Contrast the claim of the Persian envoy Yesdegusnaph atFr. 6.1.⑤Blockley1985, p.54.Justin is here clearly exploring the Persian claim.①Blockley1985, p.263.

[96] If this was the case, their monarch too would have had a capital. It is inevitable thatnomadic tribes gradually settledown after they enter agrarian areas, and the Hephthalites would not have been an exception. However, the Hephthalites had their capital after the 520s CE,at the earliest.

[97] The Turks expected both trade-relations and cooperation from the Romans against their mutual enemies. It is clear fromFr. 13.5②Blockley1985, pp.171-173.that the Persians were to be a prime target, but it is also clear from the reaction of Turxanthus (Fr. 19.1)③Blockley1985, p.263.that the Turks also aimed at the Avars, which would bring them too close to Roman territory for the Romans’ comfort. Theophanes of ByzantiumFr. 2④Henry1959, p.77.says that the Turks asked the Romans not to admit the Avars and they complied with the request.⑤Blockley1985, p.263.

6. Theophanes of Byzantium,[98]The History[99]

[98] Theophanes Byzantios was a Byzantine historian. He wrote, in ten books, the history of the Eastern Empire during the Persian war under Justin II, beginning from the second year of Justin (567 CE),in which the truce made by Justinian I with Khosrau I was broken, and going down to last year of the war.The work has not survived; only some fragments are handed down.

[99] This book records the history of the Byzantine Empire in 566-581, during the author’s lifetime.

6.1 [Fr. III]

6.1.1 Now in the reign of Justin[100]a certain Persian exhibited in Byzantium the mode in which (silk) worms are hatched, a thing which the Romans had never known before.This Persian on coming away from the country of the Seres[101]had taken with him the eggs of these worms (concealed) in a walking-stick, and succeeded in bringing them safely to Byzantium. In the beginning of spring he put out the eggs upon the mulberry leaves which form their food; and the worms feeding upon those leaves developed into winged insects and performed their other operations. Afterwards when the Emperor Justin showed the Turks the manner in which the worms were hatched, and the silk which they produced, he astonished them greatly. For at that time the Turks were in possession of the marts and ports frequented by the Seres, which had been formerly in the possession of the Persians. For when Epthalanus, King of the Ephthalites (from whom indeed the race derived that name)[102]conquered Perozes and the Persians, these latter were deprived of those places, and the Ephthalites became possessed of them.But somewhat later the Turks again conquered the Ephthalites and took the places from them in turn.①English Translation see Yule1866, p. clx.

[100] Justin, i.e., Justin II, Byzantine Emperor (r. 565-578).English translation reads “Justinianˮ,which is incorrect.

[101] Seres were inhabitants of the land Serica, named by the ancient Greeks and Romans. It meant “of silk”, or people of the “land where silk comes from”, and is thought to derive from the Chinese word for silk.

[102] Epthalanus, King of the Ephthalites: The similar record can also be seen in the Chinese literature: Liu Fan’s 劉璠Liапgdiап梁典, quoted in the item on “Xirong 西戎, V” in the section titled“Bianfang 邊防, IX” ofTопgdiап通典(ch. 193), also states: “The [king of the] state of Hua’s 滑surname is Yeda 嚈噠. His descendants named the state after their surname. As the name was mispronounced, the state also became known as ‘Yida 挹怛’.” Thus, we know that the name of this state came from the name or surname of their king.

7. Kosmas,[103]Christian Topography[104]

[103] Kosma, Indikopleustes (literally “Kosmas who sailed to India”) was an Alexandrian merchant and later hermit. He was a 6th-century traveler, having made several voyages to India during the reign of Emperor Justinian. Kosmas was a pupil of the East Syrian Patriarch Aba I and was himself a follower of the Church of the East.

[104]Сhristiап Tороgrарhу: Kosmas’ work, which contained some of the earliest world maps.

7.1.1 And so likewise among the Bactrians and Huns[105]and Persians, and the rest of the Indians and Persarmenians[106]and Medes and Elamites,[107]and throughout the whole land of Persia there is no limit to the number of churches with bishops and very large communities of Christian people, as well as many martyrs and monks also who live in solitude.②McCrindle2010, p.119-120.

[105] The Huns here refers to the White Huns, i.e., Hephthalites, who were also influenced by Christianity, mainly Nestorianism, after they entered Central Asia, and this influence was later than that of Zoroastrianism.①YuT1986, pp.143-151.

[106] Persarmenians: The dissatisfaction of theпаkhаrаrswith Arshak II led to the division of Armenia into two sections,Byzantine Armenia and Persarmenia (с. 390). The former, comprising about onefifth of Armenia, was rapidly absorbed into the Byzantine state, to which the Armenians came to contribute many emperors and generals. Persarmenia continued to be ruled by an Arsacid in Dvin, the capital after the reign of Khosrow II (r. 330–339 CE), until the deposition of Artashes IV and his replacement by a Persianтаrzрāп(governor) at the request of theпаkhаrаrs(428). Although the Armenian nobles had thus destroyed their country’s sovereignty, a sense of national unity was furthered by the development of an Armenian alphabet and a national Christian literature; culturally, if not politically, the 5th century was a golden age.

[107] Elam was an ancient country encompassing a large part of the Persian plateau at the end of the 3rd millennium BCE, but reduced to the territory of Susiana in the Achaemenid period.

7.1.2 But, in the direction of the notable seats of commerce already mentioned, there are numerous others [of less importance] both on the coast and inland, and a country of great extent. Higher up in India, that is, farther to the north, are the White Huns.[108]The one called Gollas[109]when going to war takes with him, it is said, no fewer than two thousand elephants,and a great force of cavalry. He is the lord of India, and oppressing the people forces them to pay tribute. A story goes that this king once upon a time would lay siege to an inland city of the Indians which was on every side protected by water. A long while he sat down before it,until what with his elephants, his horses and his soldiers all the water had been drunk up. He then crossed over to the city dry shod, and took it. ...②McCrindle2010, pp.370-371.The river Phison[110]separates all the countries of India [lying along its course] from the country of the Huns.③McCrindle2010, p.372.[111]

[108] The White Hun refers to the Hephthalites.

[109] Gollas, the king of the White Huns, is obviously a king of the Hephthalites. “Gollas”is an abbreviated rendering of Mihirakula. Kosmas was describing the situation of the White Huns roughly in the period 525-535 CE.①Majumdar1954, p.36.Thus, the relevant records can be explained as follows: The White Huns, who were once the lords of India (east of the Indus), had already retreated west of Indus by 535 CE, at the latest. It suggested, based on Kosmas’ records,that the “Hūṇas” never crossed the Indus and advanced east, but this is unconvincing.②YuT1986, pp.85-102.

[110] Phison refers to Indus.

[111] Mihirakula was defeated by Yasodhaman, but the influence of the Hephthalites did not completely disappear from the north-western subcontinent. From the above-quoted record of Kosmas, one can see that the Hephthalites still remained powerful to the west of Indus.

8. Theophylact Simocatta,[112]The History[113]

[112] Theophylact Simocatta was a Byzantine historiographer in the early seventh-century, arguably ranking as the last historian of Late Antiquity, writing in the time of Heraclius (c. 630) about the late Emperor Maurice (r. 582–602 CE).

[113]Thе Histоrуis a work mainly concerned with late sixth-century Byzantine warfare in the Balkans and against Persia.

8.1 [iv. 6. 6-10]

8.1.1 (6) For this Kabades[114]had been the father of Chosroes[115]the former king of Persia; but since he was a murderous man who exercised power violently and converted monarchy into tyranny, the Persians deprived him of office, shut him away in prison, and committed him to be nursed at the bosom of hardship.[116](7) His wife made frequent and regular visits to him each day, tended him with her ministrations, and by her advice persuaded him to endure with equanimity the acts of unfavourable fortune. (8) Now the commander of the prison, who was an officer and held authority over a company of soldiers, fell in love with the wife; so Kabades, when he heard this, urged his wife to share the governor’s bed and endure every squall of fortune that befell her. (9) When this had happened the watch relaxed, the strict guard was slackened, and vigilance became slave to indolence. Hence Kabades procured a transformation of his troubles, dressed himself in his wife’s clothing,and escaped from the prison, leaving behind his wife dressed in his clothes. (10) Then in the company of Seoses, a most trusted friend, he approached the Hun tribes whom history has almost universally recognized as Turks.[117]He was then entertained most hospitably by the king of the Hephthalites and he acquired very considerable forces; he defeated his opponents in battle, returned to the palace, and regained power. (11) And so Kabades measured out for Seoses the recompense for the bond of friendship and decorated him with the most preeminent offices, while he savagely exacted punishment from those who had injured him.①Whitby1997, pp.111-112.

[114] Kabades, i.e., Kavād I.

[115] Chosroes, i.e., Khusrau I.

[116] For these events, see Procopius (I, v-vi).

[117] These Huns were not Turks, but Hephthalites.

8.2 [vii. 7. 6-9]

8.2.1 (6) But since we have made reference to the Scythians,[118]both those in the Caucasus and those who face northwards, come then, come, let us interrupt our history and present, like an intercalated narrative, the events which attended these very great nations during these times. (7) When summer had arrived in this particular year, he who is celebrated by the Turks as Chagan in the east,[119]dispatched ambassadors to the emperor Maurice;[120]he composed a letter and inscribed in it victory-praises. (8) The letter’s salutation was as follows, word for word: “To the king of the Romans, the Chagan, the great lord of seven races and master of seven zones of the world.” For this very Chagan had in fact outfought the leader of the nation of the Abdeli[121](I mean indeed, of the Hephthalites, as they are called),conquered him, and assumed the rule of the nation.[122](9) Then he was greatly elated at the victory and, making an alliance with Stembis Chagan,[123]he enslaved the Avar nation. But let no one think that we are distorting the history of these times because he supposes that the Avars are those barbarians neighbouring on Europe and Pannonia, and that their arrival was prior to the times of the emperor Maurice.②Whitby1997, p.188.[124]

[118] The Scythians here refers to the barbarians in general.[119] The Chagan is probably Datou 達頭(Tardu, r. 576-603).

[120] The military narrative has reached summer 595; however, from the contents of the Chagan’s letter, it can be calculated that the embassy must have been dispatched at the very start of Maurice’s reign(r. 539–602).①Whitby1997, p.188.

[121] “Abdeli” and “Hephthalites” can be taken as different transcriptions of the same name.

[122] The Hephthalites were defeated in 558, after the Turkish Chagan and Chosroes I (Khusrau I) had joined forces against them. —English translator (no 33)②Whitby1997, p.188.

[123] Stembis Chagan is probably Shidianmi 室點密(Silzibul, Sizabul, Stembis, Sinǧibū, Istämi,r. ?-576).

[124] Since the Pseudo-Avars fled west in 558, the date when they were destroyed by the Türks should have been in this year or slightly earlier, and according to Theophylact Simocatta, the date when the Türks destroyed the Avars was before they destroyed the Pseudo-Avars; thus the date when they destroyed the Avars was also in this year or slightly earlier. The Türks destroyed the Avars and Ogors, including the Pseudo-Avars,with irresistible force after they destroyed the Hephthalites (Yeda 嚈噠) shortly before 558.③Cf. YuT2014, pp.297-325.

9. Theophanes Confessor,[125]The Chronicle[126]

[125] Theophanes Confessor was a member of the Byzantine aristocracy, who became a monk and chronicler. He is venerated on March 12 in the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church.

[126] Theophanes’ chronicle of world events, covering events from the accession of Diocletian in 284 to the downfall of Michael I Rhangabes in 813, is valuable for preserving the accounts of lost authorities on Byzantine history that would be otherwise lost for the seventh and eighth centuries. The language occupies a place midway between the stiff ecclesiastical and the vernacular Greek.

9.1 AM 5967 [AD 474/475]

9.1.1 Perozes campaigned against the Nephthalite Huns[127]and having routed them went in pursuit. But they, making their escape in small groups along the narrow passes in the mountains, retreating to right and left, got themselves behind the Persians and blockaded them through their lack of precaution. In these straits Perozes begged for peace. The emperor of the Nephthalites would not do this before Perozes fell down before him, made obeisance and gave assurances on oath that he would never again campaign against the Nephthalites.Perozes, constrained by force, was compelled to do this and retreated in great dishonour. But unable to bear the shame, he campaigned against them once more, disregarding his oaths.①Mango1997, p.188.

[127] The Nephthalite Huns are simply the Hephthalite Huns.

9.2 AM 5968 [AD 475/476]

9.2.1 In the same year Perozes went on campaign once more against the White Huns,known as Nephthalites, and perished with his entire army. For the Nephthalites dug a deep ditch, placed reeds over it, covered it with earth, and then stayed behind it. They sent out a few men to meet the Persians and then turned in flight, crossed the narrow passes one by one and fled together with all the others. The Persians, not suspecting any danger, rashly pursued them and they all, including Perozes and his sons, fell into the pit and perished. When Perozes perceived the danger, he removed the huge, brilliantly white pearl he had in his right ear (it was exceedingly costly) and threw it away so that no one after him would wear it,since it was most remarkable; no other emperor had ever before possessed anything like it. So Perozes was destroyed with all his army. Those who had not campaigned with Perozes chose Kabades as emperor, the younger son of Perozes. The barbarians ruled the Persians for two years to collect their tribute.②Mango1997, pp.189-190.

9.2.2 Kabades, rashly using his office, decreed that women were to be had in common.

So the Persians deprived him of office, bound him, and put him in prison.[128]They made

Perozes’ brother Biases, also called Valas,[129]their emperor because there were no other

sons of Perozes. Kabades’ wife looked after him in prison. The governor of the prison fell in

love with her because of her beauty. Kabades encouraged his wife to give in to the man, in

case it enabled him to escape from the fort. This she did and was then able to visit and tend

Kabades unhindered. A friend of Kabades, named Seoses, sent a message to Kabades through

his wife that he had horses and men ready in a certain village. When night came on, Kabades persuaded his wife to give him her clothes and for her to put on his clothes and remain in the prison. So Kabades got out of prison, escaped the notice of the guards, and, when he was some distance from the prison, mounted a horse and went with Seoses to the Nephthalite Huns. Their emperor gave him his daughter in marriage and having also given him a large army sent him with it against the Persians.[130]The guards, seeing the woman dressed in Kabades’ clothes, supposed for several days that Kabades was in prison. Kabades invaded Persia with his army of Huns and gained control of the empire without difficulty. He blinded Biases, also called Valas, put him in prison, and kept the empire securely for himself, for he was shrewd and energetic.[131]After that he ruled eleven years①Mango1997, p.190.

[128] This presumably refers to Kavad’s period in exile (496-498) with the Hephthalite Huns after being dethroned, probably for taking revolutionary measures inspired by Mazdakite beliefs (women in common?). His brother Zamasp was emperor in his place.②Mango1997, p.192.

[129]Valas (Oualas, Balas, Biases) in fact succeeded Peroz, as Theophanes’ chronological lists also show, reigning four years (484-488) until he was overthrown by Kavad. Theophanes’ error may have come from Procopius (I, v, 2),③Dewing1914, pp.31-33.who also confuses Biases with Zamasp.④Mango1997, p.192.

[130]Kavad’s periods of rule were 488-498 (with a period in exile from 496 to 498) and 498-531. Theophanes’ figure of eleven years is taken from his chronological list of Persian kings which he shares with Agathias (IV, xxviii-xxix),⑤Frendo1975, pp.131-133.and ought to have included the period in exile during Zamasp’s interregnum. But the chronological lists of both Theophanes and Agathias give Kavad eleven years before Zamasp’s interregnum (which is given as four years, AM 5984-5987), and then a further 30 years (AM 5988-6017 i.e., 495/496 to 524/525), which still leaves Theophanes six years short of the true date.⑥Mango1997, p.192.

[131] Cf. Procopius, I, vi (= §2.3).

10.Die Akten der Edessenischen Bekenner Gurjas, Samonas und Abibos,aus dem Nachlass von Oscar von Gebhardt[132]

[132]Guria, Shmona and Habib were the Edessan martyrs during the reign of Diocletian (r. 284-305).The original texts on the Martyrdoms of the Saints were composed at the end of the 4th century CE. There are two modern editions. The first is based on the Greek texts. The second is based on the Syriac texts.Only the Greek version refers to the Hephthalites, the Syriac version refers to them as “Huns”.

10.1 [ii]

10.1.1 The Hephthalite Huns reside to the East, next to Persia. This awful and barbaric nation, not many years after putting the martyrs to death, brought many disasters to the Romans, reaching even Edessa and looting its surrounding regions. The Roman kings(emperors) fiercely resisted them and, within a short period, gathered a great army to defend Edessa with the aim of keeping it safe, taking courage from the sayings of Jesus Christ, who had communicated to Avgarus[133], that the city would never succumb to barbarians; and the icon of Jesus was firstly sent to this city and Avgarus. The Huns,thus, stormed the city,believing that they will easily take it. The Romans sent an army to the support the residents of Edessa, to prevent the city from falling to the Huns.[134]①Dobschütz1911, p.151.... While the Huns and the Persians agreed to campaign again, after a certain period, against these regions, the Roman king sends once more a large number of soldiers in order to protect these lands; together with these(Roman) troops, also comes he who has done evil to (has harmed) the daughter.②Dobschütz1911, p.186.[Translated into English by Michael Kordosis and Stefanos Kordosis]③I am indebted to Prof. Michael Kordosis and Dr. Stefanos Kordosis (Ioannina University, Greece) for their kind help in translation of the Greek sources into English.

[133] Avgarus was the King of Edessa during Jesus Christ’s life. He was the ruler who received the first image of Christ, the so-called holy tissue (άγιoμανδύλιo), which was a piece of sheet that was put over Jesus Christ when he was crucified. From the blood in his face his image was depicted. —English translators’ note

[134] In this record the Hephthalites and the Huns in Europe seem to be confused.

11. Nikephoros Callistus,[135]Historia Ecclesiastica[136]

[135] Nikephoros Callistus (Nikephoros Kallistos Xanthopoulos), of Constantinople, the last of the Greek ecclesiastical historians, flourished around 1320.

[136] HisHistоriа Ессlеsiаstiса,in eighteen books, brings the narrative down to 610; for the first four centuries the author is largely dependent on his predecessors, and his additions showing very little critical faculty; for the later period his labors, based on documents now no longer extant, to which he had free access, though he used them also with small discrimination, are much more valuable.

11.1 [Tomus 16, xxxvi]

11.1.1 Even Perozes, the King of Persians, returned humiliated after his campaigns against the Hephthalites, since he, having confined himself in narrow passages while pursuing them, was suddenly attacked from behind, put in the crossfire and had no exit from the predicament. Being in a situation like that he asked for peace. But, the ruler of Nephthalites[137]refused to make peace with him, unless Perozes firstly kneeled in front of him and gave the necessary guarantees, sealed by oath, that he would never again campaign against the Hephthalites. He (Perozes), forced by the situation he was in, conceded to do those unreasonable things. Thus, filled with disgrace, he returned. Later, though,notwithstanding the shame, he campaigned against them, breaking his oaths. Again, they (the Nephthalites), after performing the fake retreat (while being pursued by Perozes armies),killed Perozes, because of his unreliability. The Persians, put Kavades in power, who was his(Perozes’) youngest son and who, being in power, legislated for treating the women as public to everyone. For this reason the Persians removed him from power and sent him to prison,putting to power Perozes’ other son, Vlasso.[138]Kavades’ wife, being with him in prison,served him as she should. Beautiful as she was, the head of the guard of the prison fell in love with her and asked her to respond to his love. As she was loyal to her husband and as she loved him, she confessed to him the guard’s love for her. Kavades instructed her to respond to her lover’s feelings. After doing the sinful deed, the woman could approach her husband more easily in order to serve him. A close friend of Kavades sent to him a message, through his wife, that he had prepared horses and men at a certain place, who, if the former wanted to escape, would help him get his throne back. When night came, Kavades convinced his wife to take his place in prison by wearing his clothes. Kavades, after putting on his wife’s clothes,departed from prison, pretending to be her. And so, Kavades’ escape was realized. And Kavades, survived by quickly taking refuge to the Hephthalites, through Seis[139](that is the name of his friend). The ruler of Hephthalites, having provided Kavades with an army and his daughter as wife, told him to march against Persia and retake power. Kavades invaded Persia and effortlessly took the power back. And, after arresting his brother Vlassos, he put him to prison, after blinding him. Kavades, being clever and active, managed to hold his kingship ever since securely. And being in power for 11 years, he firstly made a peace treaty with the Romans. Then, he asked for a loan from Anastasius,[140]but he responded that if he (Kavades) wanted to borrow money he would have to ask for a public bill,otherwise he would not receive a single coin. Kavades, thus, campaigned against the Romans, by breaking the peace treaty.①Ессlеsiаstiс Histоri , pp.196-197.[141][Translated into English by Michael Kordosis and Stefanos Kordosis]

[137] Callistus mentions the Hepthalites as Nephthalites, like Agathiae. – English translators’ note

[138]Procopius considers Bλάσην(Vlasin) to be Peroze’s brother, while Callistus presents him as Peroze’s son. – English translators’ note

[139] The Persian who helped Kavades is called as “Seoses” (Σεóσης) while Callistus calls him Seis(Σέης). – English translators’ note

[140] Procopius mentions that Kavades wanted to borrow money from the Byzantines (from Emperor Anastasius) in order to give it to the Hephthalites, because he owed them. Those that Anastasius consulted, advised him not to agree with the Persians — i.e. not to lend them the money — so that the Hephthalites remain enemies with the Persians. Callistus mentions that Anastasius told the Persians that they would not receive a single coin unless they signed a treaty (γραμματεῖoν - a financial deal).Consequently, according to Callistus, Anastasius agreed to give money to the Persians under certain conditions. — English translators’ note

[141]Nicephorus Callistus’ remarks on the Hephthalites are taken from Procopius. In essence,Callistus provides the reader with a summary of Procopius’ writings on the Hephthalites, but he omits a lot of information, which he considers unnecessarily detailed or with mythical elements. He does not duplicate the information taken from Procopius correctly, but he presents the events briefly. Additionally,he makes use of the vocabulary that is attested in Procopius’ work. Generally speaking, the way Callistus has arranged the information is not very different from the way Procopius arranged his essay and Callistus’elements that are different in his text are very few. Nicephorus calls the (N/H)ephthalites “Huns”, omitting the adjective “white” which is attested in Procopius’ work, in the paragraph where Procopius describes the Hephthalites (a paragraph omitted by Callistus). — English translators’ note

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Blockley1981-1983(I-II) = R. C. Blockley,Thе Frаgтепtаrу Сlаssiсisiпg Histоriапs оf thе Lаtеr Rотап Етрirе(Eunapius, Olympiodorus, Priscus and Malchus), ARCA Classical and Medieval Texts, Papers and Monographs 10, Francis Cairns, 1981-1983.

Blockley1985 = R. C. Blockley,Thе Histоrу оf Мепапdеr thе Gиаrdsтап, Iпtrоdисtоrу Еssау, Tехt, Trапslаtiоп,апd Histоriоgrарhiсаl Nоtеs,Published by Francis Cairns Ltd., Printed in Great Britain by Redwood Burn Ltd. Trowbridge, Wiltshire, 1985.

Bury1897 = J. B. Bury, “The Turcs in the Sixth Century”,Thе Епglish Histоriсаl Rеviеw12 (1897), pp. 417-426.

Cahun1896 = E. Cahun,Iпtrоdисtiоп à l'histоirе dе l'Аsiе,Paris, 1896.

Cameron1969 = Averil Cameron, “Agathias on the Sasanians” inDитbаrtоп Oаks Pареrs23 (1969-1970),p. 67-183.

Dennis1984 = George T. Dennis, tr.,Маиriсе's Strаtеgikоп: Hапdbооk оf Вуzапtiпе Мilitаrу Strаtеgу,Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1984.

Dewing1914 = H. B. Dewing, tr., Procopius,Histоrу оf thе Wаrs,with an English Translation, vol. 1, New York, 1914.

Dobschütz1911 = Ernst von Dobschütz,Diе Аktеп dеr Еdеssепisсhеп Веkеппеr Gиrjаs, Sатопаs ипd Аbibоs,аиs dет Nасhlаss vоп Osсаr vоп Gеbhаrdt,Leipzig, 1911.

Ессlеsiаstiс Histоri= Nicephori Callisti Xanthopuli,Ессlеsiаstiс Histоri ,Libri XVIII, accurante et denuo recognoscente J.-P. Migne,Parisiis: excudebatur et venit apud J.-P. Migne, 1865.

Frendo1975 = Joseph D. Frendo,Аgаthiаs: thе Histоriеs,Translated with an Introduction and Short Explanatory Notes by Joseph D. Frendo, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, New York, 1975.

Güterbock1906 = K. Güterbock,Вуzапz ипd Pеrsiеп iп ihrеп diрlотаtisсhеп Веziеhипgеп iт Zеitаltеr Jиstiпiапs,Beilin, 1906.

Hannestad1955-1957 = K. Hannestad, “Les relations de Byzance avec la Transcausie au Ve et Vle siècles”,Byzantion 25-27 (1955-1957), pp. 421-456.

Haussig1953 = H. W. Haussig, “Theophylakts Exkurs über die Skythischen Völker”,Вуzапtiоп,23(1953), pp.275-462.

Henry1959 = Photius,Вibliоthеса,ed. R. Henry, vol. 11, Paris, 1959 (соd.64 II), pp. 76-79.

Majumdar1954 = R. C. Majumdar,Thе Сlаssiсаl Аgе, Histоrу апd Сиltиrе оf thе Iпdiа Pеорlе,vol. 3,Bombay, 1954.

Mango1997 =Thе Сhrопiсlе оf Thеорhапеs Сопfеssоr Вуzапtiпе апd Nеаr Еаstеrп Histоrу А.D. 284-813,Translated with Introduction and Commentary by Cyril Mango and Roger Scott, with the assistance of Geoffrey Greatrex, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1997.

McCrindle2010 =Thе Сhristiап Tороgrарhу оf Соsтаs, ап Еgурtiап Мопk.Translated from the Greek, and Edited with Notes and Introduction by J. W. McCrindle. Cambridge University Press, 2010.

Uchida1959=Uchida Ginpū 內田吟風, “Zenzen no Kitara Gesshi Ryō Baruku Chiō Shinnyūni tsuite”蠕蠕の寄多羅月氏領バルク地方侵入について (On the Invasion of Bactria, the Territory of the Jiduoluo Yuezhi),Tōуōshi Kепkуū東洋史研究8～2 (1959), pp.23-34.

Whitby1997 = Michael and Mary Whitby,Thе Histоrу оf Thеорhуlасt Siтосаttа: Ап Епglish Trапslаtiоп with Iпtrоdисtiоп апd Nоtеs,Oxford, 1997.

Yule1866= H. Yule,Саthау апd thе Wау Thithеr,being a collection of Medieval Notices of China. Translated and Edited by C. H. Yule, vol. I. London: printed for the Hakluyt Society, 1866.

YuT1986 = Yu Taishan,Yеdаshi Yапjiи嚈噠史研究 (A Study of the History of the Hephthalites). Jinan: Qilu Publishing House, 1986.

YuT2001 = Yu Taishan,“Yeda Shi Ruogan Wenti de Zai Yanjiu” 嚈噠史若干問題的再研究 (The Re-Examination of Issues in Hephthalite History),Zhопggио Shеhиi Kехиеуиап Lishi Yапjiиsио Хиеkап中國社會科學院歷史研究所學刊 (Annals of the Institute of History, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences) 1,Beijing: Social Science Literature Press, 2001, pp. 180-210.

YuT2014 =Сhiпа апd thе Меditеrrапеап Wоrld iп Апсiепt Tiтеs.Romanian Academy Institute of Archaeology of Iaşi. Bucureşti-Brăila, 2014.

Zhoushu =Zhоиshи周書, compiled by Linghu Defen 令狐德棻(Tang)еt аl.,Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company, 1983.