VIII.] SUCCESSION IN ARMENIA. 217 on the. Armenian throne by his son Leo II, who seems to have clung to the Tartar alliance as against Egypt, and tq have come to an open rupture with the Pope on the other, side. He was likewise in close alliance with Byzantium, and, although his history is obscure, he seems to have asserted an independent position for which his successors toiled in vain. He reigned eighteen years, and was followed by four of his sons in succession. Of these Hayton II purchased the support of the West by reconciling himself and his people to Rome ; he was a poet and historian also, and ended in becoming a Franciscan, as Friar John. With his brother, Thoros, who on his withdrawal became king, he went to Constantinople to obtain help from Andronicus Paleologus. On their return they found themselves unseated by a third brother, Sembat ; fled to Cyprus first and then to Tartary, but were taken ; Hayton was blinded and Thoros strangled. Sembat had thrown over the Roman alliance and been crowned by the Armenian Catholicos ; but, finding the Saracens still gaining ground, he changed his. tactics, and obtained from Boniface VIII a bull for a subsidy, which was circulated in England in 12.981. He was supplanted in his turn by his brother Constantius. He, after a short, reign, was succeeded by Leo III, son of Thoros, who reigned under, the guardianship of his uncle, the blind brother John, who had been king as Hayton II. Both Leo and his uncle were put to death by a Tartar general, at the suggestion, according to the Roman writers, of the discontented Armenians, who had been again too summarily reconciled to the papacy in. a council at Sis, in 1307. Oissim, who succeeded in 1308, was another son of Leo II. He was connected with the Cypriot history, taking part with the brothers of King Henry against him ; and he also obtained a confirmation of the union with the Roman Church in 1316. Leo IV, who was the last of the 1 Feed. i. 900.