[53] Nearly with equal warrant, Julian (_Caes._ p. 328) makes the emperor say that he had not taken up arms against the Parthians before they had violated right, and Dio (lxviii. 17) reproaches him with having waged the war from ambition. [54] Hadrian cannot possibly have released Armenia from the position of a Roman dependency. The notice of his biographer, c. 21: _Armeniis regem habere permisit, cum sub Traiano legatum habuissent_ points rather to the contrary, and we find at the end of Hadrian’s reign a contingent of Armenians in the army of the governor of Cappadocia (Arrian, _c. Alan._ 29). Pius did not merely induce the Parthians by his representations to desist from the intended invasion of Armenia (_vita_, 9), but also in fact invested them with Armenia (coins from the years 140-144, Eckhel, vii. p. 15). The fact also that Iberia certainly stood in the relation of dependence under Pius, because otherwise the Parthians could not have brought complaints as to its king in Rome (Dio, lxix. 15), presupposes a like dependent relation for Armenia. The names of the Armenian kings of this period are not known. If the _proximae gentes_, with the rule of which Hadrian compensated the Parthian prince nominated as Parthian king by Trajan (_vita_, c. 5), were in fact Armenians, which is not improbable, there lies in it a confirmation as well of the lasting dependence of Armenia on Rome as of the continuous rule of the Arsacids there. Even the Ἀυρήλιος Πάκορος βασιλεὺς μεγάλης Ἀρμενίας, who erected a monument in Rome to his brother Aurelius Merithates who died there (_C. I. Gr._ 6559), belongs from his name to the house of the Arsacids. But he was hardly the king of Armenia installed by Vologasus IV. and deposed by the Romans (p. 74); if the latter had come to Rome as a captive, we should know it, and even he would hardly have been allowed to call himself king of Great Armenia in a Roman inscription. [55] As vassals holding from Trajan or Hadrian, Arrian (_Peripl._ c. 15) adduces the Heniochi and Machelones (comp. Dio, lxviii. 18; lxxi. 14); the Lazi (comp. Suidas, _s. v._ Δομετιανός), over whom also Pius put a king (_vita_, 9); the Apsilae; the Abasgi; the Sanigae, these all within the imperial frontier reaching as far as Dioscurias = Sebastopolis; beyond it, in the region of the Bosporan vassal-state, the Zichi or Zinchi (_ib._ c. 27). [56] This is confirmed not only by Arrian, _Peripl._ c. 7, but by the officer of Hadrian’s time _praepositus numerorum tendentium in Ponto Absaro_ (_C. I. L._ x. 1202). [57] Comp. p. 75 note 2. The detachment probably of 1000 men (because under a tribune) doing garrison duty in the year 185 in Valarshapat (Etshmiazin) not far from Artaxata, belonged to one of the Cappadocian legions (_C. I. L._ iii. 6052).