The Byzantine and Sassanid Empires divided Armenia in 387 and in 428. Western Armenia fell under Byzantine rule, and Eastern Armenia fell under Sassanid control. Even after the establishment of the Bagratid Armenian Kingdom, parts of historic Armenia and Armenian-inhabited areas were still under Byzantine rule.
The Armenians had no representation in the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon in 451, due to their struggle against the Sassanids in an armed rebellion. For that reason, there appeared a theological drift between Armenian and Byzantine Christianity.
Regardless, many Armenians became successful in the Byzantine Empire. Numerous Byzantine emperors were either ethnically Armenian, half-Armenian, part-Armenian or possibly Armenian; although culturally Greek. The best example of this is Emperor Heraclius, whose father was Armenian and mother Cappadocian. Emperor Heraclius began the Heraclean Dynasty (610–717). Basil I is another example of an Armenian beginning a dynasty; the Macedonian dynasty. Other great emperors were Romanos I, John I Tzimiskes, and Nikephoros II.
History
Origins
Lucullus and Pompey had pushed the influence of Rome to Armenia around 66 BC. AD. Tigrane II, the Armenian king of that time, was forced to pay tribute to the Romans and he lost many territories. Armenia had become a buffer state between Rome and Arsacid Persia. After the death of Tigrane II, the Roman general Marc Antoine tried to give the kingdom to one of his sons. The general's defeat at Actium in 31 BC. AD, however, ended his ambition to leave the kingdomto his descendants. Artaxias II, grandson of Tigrane, succeeds with the help of the Persians, to regain control of the territory. Towards the end of the 1 st century BC, internal conflicts between the pro-Roman and propersian Armenians precipitated the Artaxiad dynasty towards its end in 10 BC. AD. In the first century, Armenia was politically divided between the Roman Empireand Arsacid Persia. To ensure they have some control over Armenia, the Romans offer a compromise. Aware of the fact that the Persians are very influential in Armenia and that the Armenian monarchy is of Persian origin, the Romans propose to leave this Persian monarchy at the head of the country but they want to give the crown to the king. In this way, the Arsacids retain their power over Armenia and Rome made it a protectorate. The situation is quite stable until iv th century despite some turbulence on both sides of the border.
The iv th to the vii th century
In 387, the Roman situation was not at its best due to the Germanic invasions. In addition, Persia knows the emergence of a new dynasty, the Sassanids. A certain influence on Armenia must be kept. This is why the two powers agree on a division of the kingdom. Thus, the region becomes three new political entities: the imperial province of Armenia minor located west of the Euphrates, the kingdom of Great Armenia located east and the satrapiesArmenian women in the South. The satrapies and the kingdom of Great Armenia are under Persian influence and represent 4/5 of the historic Armenian territory. The imperial province is headed by a Comes Armeniae, a governor of species, until the reign of Justinian I to vi th century. During his reign, Justinian increased the size of the imperial province by integrating part of the territory of the southern satrapies and part of the Pont region in Anatolia. This territorial expansion has resulted in the creation of 4 new territorial entities, the provinces of Armenia I to IV 5. These Byzantine provinces reached their territorial apogee during the reign of the Emperor Mauritius, which extended Armenian territory to the east near Dvin and to the northwest near Lake Van by the peace treaty of 591.
The Armenian provinces were finally conquered in the middle of the vii th century by the Arabs after increasing tensions between Byzantium and Armenia. In fact, Byzantium tried to integrate the Armenian Church into its own and to impose its worship and traditions. This attempt at religious imperialism ignited the anger of the local nobles as well as that of the clergy. So when the Arabs marched on the provinces, local forces did not offer much resistance.
Arab domination and the revival of Armenian royal power
The vii th century marked a change not only for Armenia but for almost Near and Middle East. A new political force, the Arabs overthrow the Sassanid power in Persia and snatch Syria and Egypt from the Byzantines. This new power allows significant social changes in Armenia. At the start of the Arab presence taxes were low and social control was moderate. The occupiers recruited Armenian horsemen to protect themselves from attacks from the Khazars in the North Caucasus. In addition, Armenia, Iberiaand Caucasian Albania are politically reorganized into a single province called Armîniya. During this period, the provincial governor bore the title of ostikan. The western border of Arminiya was militarized and turned against Byzantium. If this period is marked by a cultural development and renewal, the Arab government of the Umayyads and later the Abbasids has always been very difficult to establish legally on the territory of Armenia. Regular revolts took place against Arab administrators due to tightening of power. Then, before the character hotter insurgencies, the Caliph Abbasid recognizes the representative of Bagratid family, Ashot I st as ruler of Armenia and releases nakharars who revolted. Indeed, the ix th century, the Abbasid Caliphate enters a difficult period and Byzantium began an expansion to the East. During the same period, Ashot I first became ruler of the dynasty Bagratid north and south during this time, the arçrouni dynasty control areaVaspourakan. This short national revival ends during the second part of the x th century, when the Byzantine Empire extends again its territory to Armenia and reinstate the imperial court.
x th and xi th centuries
If the first part of the x th century was characterized by the revival of royal power in Armenia, the second part however, marks the return of the Byzantines in Armenia. By the end of the x th century, the Bagratuni kingdom and arçrouni of Great Armenia fell one after the other into the hands Byzantine: the Taron in 968, the Tayk in 1001, the Vaspurakan in 1021 or 1022, Ani in 1045, Kars in 1065; only the Lorri escapes the emperors. If the Taron becomes in 968, an imperial province, it is not at this time of a pure and simple assimilation. Indeed, the Emperor Jean Tzimiskès and the Bagratide king Ashot III collaborate during this period. During the reign of Basil II, the tone changes and he goes forward to assimilate the other Armenian territories. The aggressiveness of the Byzantine invasion forces King Arçrouni Gagik IIto abdicate and entrust his lands to the Byzantines. Most of the Armenian territories were integrated into imperial themes such as that of Iberia and Mesopotamia. This Byzantine domination, which sees most of the Armenian nobility migrating to Anatolia and Cilicia 16, is short-lived: the Seljuk threat is indeed on the horizon.
The first foray occurred in 1045 - 1046, followed by many others, and, theAugust 16, 1064, sultan Alp Arslan takes Ani. Most of Armenia then succumbed to the Seljuk assaults, with the exception of Lorri and Siounie; the battle of Manzikert, in 1071, consecrates the conquest of Armenia, just like the geographical rupture of Byzantium with this country. The country is then integrated into the Persian Seljuk and entrusted to various emirs based notably Dvin and Ganzak, the last islands (Lorri and Siounie) succumbing to the xii th Century.
Armenian military in the Byzantine Army
Armenia made great contributions to Byzantium through its troops of soldiers. The empire was in need of a good army as it was constantly being threatened. The army was relatively small, never exceeding 150,000 men. The military was sent to different parts of the empire, and took part in the most fierce battles and never exceeded 20,000 or 30,000 men. From the 5th century forwards the Armenians were regarded as the main constituent of the Byzantine army. Procopius recounts that the scholarii, the palace guards of the emperor, "were selected from amongst the bravest Armenians".
Armenian soldiers in the Byzantine army are cited during the following centuries, especially during the 9th and the 10th centuries, which might have been the period of greatest participation of the Armenians in the Byzantine army. Byzantine and Arab historians are unanimous in recognizing significance of the Armenians soldiers. Charles Diehl, for instance, writes: “The Armenian units, particularly during this period, were numerous and well trained.” Another Byzantine historian praises the decisive role which the Armenian infantry played in the victories of the Byzantine emperors Nicephorus Phocas and John Tzimiskes.
At that time the Armenians served side by side with the Norsemen who were in the Byzantine army. This first encounter between the Armenian mountain-dwellers and the Norse has been discussed by Nansen, who brings these two elements closer to each other and records: “It was the Armenians who together with our Scandinavian forefathers made up the assault units of Byzantine.” Moreover, Bussel underlines the similarities in the way of thinking and the spirit of the Armenian feudal lords and the northern warriors. He claims that, in both groups, there was a strange absence and ignorance of government and public interest and at the same time an equally large interest in achieving personal distinctions and a loyalty towards their masters and leaders.
Armenian Emperors of Byzantium
The partition of the Roman Empire between the two sons of the Emperor Theodosius was soon followed by a predominance of foreign elements in the court of Byzantium, the eastern half of the divided world. The proximity of this capital of the East to Armenia attracted to the shores of the Bosporus a great number of Armenians, and for three centuries they played a distinguished part in the history of the Eastern Empire.
The important role played in the history of Byzantium by the Armenians has been generally unrecognized.
Council of Theodosiopolis (593)
After the conclusion of long Byzantine-Persian War (572-591), direct Byzantine rule was extended to all western regions of Armenia. In order to strengthen political control over newly annexed regions, emperor Maurice (582-602) decided to support pro-Chalcedonian fraction of the local Armenian Church. In 593, regional council of western Armenian bishops was convened in Theodosiopolis, and proclaimed full allegiance to the Chalcedonian Definition. The council also elected John (Yovhannes, or Hovhannes) of Bagaran as new Catholicos of Chalcedonian Armenians.
Religion
Armenia is often considered the first country in the world to have adopted Christianity as the official religion. Located at the crossroads between the Greek and Syriac churches, the Armenian Church was influenced by them. The Church of Armenia distances itself from the Imperial Church from the Council of Chalcedon in 451.
The peculiarities of the Armenian Church
The official Christianization of Armenia is attributed to the Bishop of Cappadocia, Gregory the Illuminator at the iv th century. The latter converted King Tiridates as well as the entire royal court and the Armenian nobility After this conversion, Gregory was charged with building the Church of Armenia and organizing his clergy. In the iv th century the Armenian church has several features that make the already different from the imperial Byzantine Church. First of all, the Armenian high clergy is made up of about 12 bishops who are under the direction of a Catholicos, the equivalent of the patriarch. The Catholicos was inspired by the Persian pontiff and was to receive the title at Caesarea in Cappadocia. The king and the head of the Church worked hand in hand. But given the feudal structure of the country, that the Catholicos was working closely with the king caused administrative problems. Then, the pontiffs were very often at the beginning of Armenian ecclesiastical history, people who followed the line of Gregory the Illuminator. However, when there was a civil conflict, it was clerics who were in the line of the Greek bishop Aghbianos or a Syrian bishop who would occupy the post of Catholicos. To simplify, the catholicosGreeks were closer to the Byzantine Church and were more zealots while their Syrian counterparts were less intrusive in the affairs of state and less intense in their beliefs. The very fact that there were clerics of Greek or Syriac inspiration can be explained by the training of priests who were trained in one or the other language depending on the region. In addition, translators were trained to comment on the Eucharist in Armenian before the faithful so that they would understand. Besides, nepotism was almost institutional in this Church at its beginnings. For a few generations, the Catholicos and probably the bishops also passed their title to the next generation. Finally, the v th century saw the birth of the Armenian alphabet that enables the translation of the liturgy and Christian and Christianity has been able to penetrate the popular class. The Armenian Church continued to evolve over time, but it was in the context of conflict with the Byzantine Church that it was transformed.
Conflicts with the Imperial Church
The break between the Armenian and imperial churches originates discussions related to the nature of Christ in the early centuries of Christianity. It must first be understood that the first three councils on the nature of Jesus Christ, those of Nicea, Constantinople and Ephesus, were never a source of controversy in the Church of Armenia and that the Pre-existing conflicts between the two Churches were of an administrative nature. These conflicts were not of the same gravity as the Council of 451. It is, in fact, the Council of Chalcedony which is at the origin of the birth of an autocephalous Armenian Church. When the council took place, the Armenians faced a serious crisis that threatened Christianity in the Sassanid part of their kingdom. Indeed, the king of Persia had ordered the conversion of the Armenians to Mazdéisme. Busy in protecting its religion from the Sassanid threat, Armenia had not sent any representative to the Council of Chalcedon and was not made aware of its conclusions until after the conflict with the Persians. As soon as the Church learned of the content of the council, she immediately rejected it, declaring it Nestorian and thus heretical. Armenians were later labeled as monophysites by the Western Churchand the Eastern Church but the fact is that they were not monophysites but rather adherent to the doctrine of Saint Cyril of Alexandria. This means that they rejected the confusion of the divine and human natures of Christ preached by Eutychès, but that they reject the idea according to which the two natures are united as wanted by the council of Chalcedon. On several occasions, during the following centuries, the Byzantines tried to reconcile their Church with that of the Armenians by various means. First, the Emperor Maurice at the end of the vi th century, has set up a Catholicos rival to try to discredit the Catholicosofficial. The result of this attempt was to create a short schism in the Church of Armenia. Mauritius' successors will also try other approaches, but all of their attempts at compromise have been unsuccessful. During the revival period of royal power in Armenia, negotiations take place between the Byzantines and the Bagratuni kings unsuccessful. Finally, the last attempt at reconciliation takes place at the xii th century Cilician Armenia during the reign of Manuel I Comnenus and is another failure. While it is true that the two Churches were divided during most of the Byzantine period of Armenia, the two Churches also have important points in common. The Armenian liturgy is the liturgy of Saint Basil, a Greek bishop, and the Armenian clergy is equally divided between the black clergy and the white clergy (respectively married and single).
Armenian arts, literature and architecture
The Art of Byzantine Armenia can be subdivided into two main periods: iv e in the first half of the viii th century and the second half of ix th century xi th century. These two periods correspond respectively to the first Byzantine period and the rebirth of royal power under the Bagratides (and the return to the Byzantine Empire).
Arts and architecture of the first Byzantine period (305-750)
In art during this first period, we see many sculptures on the cornices of buildings and sometimes biblical scenes or portraits of patrons inside the buildings. However, it should be understood that the interior decoration is only done in Armenian capitals. Armenian art has in particular that it is not only biblical characters who are represented but also historical characters and laymen 36. During this same period, we can see in illuminations, frescoes and mosaics.In addition, even if Byzantium dominated Armenia during this period, Armenian art has Persian influences as to the manner of representing the clothing and posture of the characters.
In architecture, the churches were built in the shape of a cross and surmounted by domes. These same domes were sometimes supported by horns.
Arts and architecture of the royal renaissance period and second Byzantine period (862-1021)
Although there were internal and external changes during these 7 centuries, there were also several elements of continuity especially in architecture. If architecture, buildings retain substantially the same form they had at the vii th century architectural elements Muslims are part of the sculptural decoration. Indeed, the building stones used are of several colors, the interlacing make their appearance in the decoration and we also see the replacement of the tubes by muqarnas.
In painting, the Armenians mainly use the Byzantine style for their illuminations, their paintings but we also see the influence of Islam in the decorative art of the Gospels. Indeed, King Gagik of Kars had a copy of the Gospels with an image representative with his family in Arab held on the East mats
Armenian literature
In literature, during the first period, texts of Greek philosophy were translated and texts relating to historical facts were written or modified to justify political positions. During the second period, the books of stories multiply. For example, one sees a history book written by Shapuh Bagratid which compiles the history of the deluge to 923. It was not the only one to have been published because even the Arçrouni published their version. We also see history books on other peoples being written at the same period, in particular a History on the Caucasian Albanians. Finally, books of tales and stories are compiled and a national epic titled David Sasun reads.
Commerce
Trade before the Arab invasions
From Late Antiquity, Armenia played a crucial role in trade between the West and the East. During the period when Armenia was between the Byzantine Empire and the Sassanian Persia, Byzantium sold products to the whole world from the Eastern trade routes. The Empire bought silk, ivory, precious stones, spices, pearls, flavored products, gold and other products in the East. In addition, by these same trade routes, Byzantium sold glass products,wine, purple clothing and many other products. These trade routes were not only important for Byzantium, which obtained the silks from China and for Persia, which presumably controlled all eastern trade,but also for Armenia. Indeed, trade between the West and the East benefited the Caucasian state enormously, since many cities were built during this period. In addition, in the commercial treaty between Justinian and Choroes I, king of Persia, there was a clause which preserved the border trade posts of Armenia, which allowed him to remain one of the key pieces of international trade. For commercial transactions, the Armenians, having no proper currency, used Byzantine or Arab coins.
From the reconquest to the battle of Mantzikert
Armenia ceased to benefit fully from foreign trade after the invasion of the Seljuk Turks. But the decline began under the Byzantine reconquest. When the Byzantines were reinstated Armenia in its territory, the landed nobility was moved in Cilicia or in Asia Minor and the imperial administration replaced them. The armed forces of the Bagratids were replaced by the Byzantine soldiers for the defense of the territory. Under Constantin Monomaque and Constantin Doukas, the soldiers' pay was cut, a large part of the forces were demobilized. This strategy aimed to improve the state of the finances of the Empire. The Seljuk's first attacks, therefore, encountered only minimal resistance, which enabled them to march easily to Constantinople.
Armenians in Byzantium
The Imperial Armenians
The Armenians were not exclusively concentrated in the provinces of Armenia I to IV and later in the themes which had been created from the territories of Armenia. Some Armenians lived in Constantinople and others were even colonized the lands far from home as the Balkans and southern Italy in the viii th century. In addition to colonizing certain regions of the Empire, the Armenians, especially the Chalcedonian confessional, held important positions in the imperial army. The Armenian military were Hellenized and played a major role in the x th century in the reconquest of Armenia by the Byzantine. In addition, some Byzantine emperors were Armenian or of Armenian descent, for example Leon V and Jean I er Tzimiskès. It is estimated that the same xi th century, about 10 to 15% of the nobility was of Armenian origin although the nobility was not very close to the Comneno. Finally, late in the xi th century, the Armenian nobles participated in the creation of the Cilician Armenia, an independent state from the Byzantine Empire.
Armenians living in the kingdom of Armenia
Even though the Armenians obviously formed a large ethnic group within the Empire, that does not mean that they were all well regarded. Indeed, Greek Byzantine literature often depicts them as deceitful and prone to betrayal. As for the Armenians who lived in Armenia, the reconquest of their lands by the Byzantines was seen as a betrayal. An example of this is in a chronicle of Matthew of Edessa where he speaks of a betrayal on the part of the Armenian nobles of Byzantium. According to him, due to the acts of the nobility, the king of Armenia would never return to rule his kingdom. During this period, non-Chalcedonian Armenianssee the Greeks as evil beings who seek to destroy their faith and their kingdom. In the aftermath of the Battle of Mantzikert, the Armenians of Cilicia never accepted the Council of Chalcedon and some Armenian nobles turned their backs on the Empire. Those who did not live in Cilician Armenia slowly began to turn against the Emperor. The soldiers were no longer reliable, urban Armenian communities isolated themselves Byzantine fear of seeing their corrupt faith and Armenians Balkans or Troas rebelled alongside the enemies of the Empire.
没有评论:
发表评论