ARAM, 9-10 (1997-1998), 577-587C.M. WALBINER 577

BISHOPS AND METROPOLITANS OF THE ANTIOCHIAN PATRIARCHATE IN THE 17th CENTURY (THEIR RELATIONS TO THE MUSLIM AUTHORITIES, THEIR CULTURAL ACTIVITIES AND THEIR ETHNIC BACKGROUND)

CARSTEN-MICHAEL WALBINER

1. INTRODUCTION

There are two good reasons for limiting this study to the 17th century. On one hand several sources of mainly Arab origin allow a nearly complete recon- struction of the notitiae, the lists of the espicopal sees, for this century;1 on the other hand these sources provide interesting biographical material about the in- cumbents which is not available in this abundance for earlier periods. In addition, one should not forget that the 17th century is of special impor- tance for the history of the Melkites. It became the starting point for a process of cultural revival amongst the Arab Christians. Greek Orthodox metropolitans and patriarchs like Meletius Za¨im, Meletius Karmah and Athanasius ad- Dabbas were the early protagonists of this movement.2 In the field of Church policy the 17th century has to be recognised as the eve of the splitting of the Antiochian patriarchate into an Orthodox and a Catholic branch, which finally became reality in 1724.3 In both spheres – that of culture and that of Church policy – the development was influenced by intensified relations with Euro- pean powers and institutions as well as with the Orthodox East. I shall mention

1 On these sources see my article, “Die Bischofs- und Metropolitensitze des griechisch- orthodoxen Patriarchats von Antiochia von 1594 bis 1664 nach einigen zeitgenössischen Quellen”, in Oriens Christianus, 82 (1998), pp. 99-152. 2 On the literary activities of the Melkites in the 17th century, cf. Joseph Nasrallah, Histoire du mouvement littéraire dans l’Eglise Melchite du Ve au XXe siècle, Vol. IV/1, (Louvain, 1979); Georg Graf, Geschichte der christlichen arabischen Literatur, Dritter Band: Die Schriftsteller von der Mitte des 15. bis zum Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts (Melchiten, Maroniten), (Studi e Testi, 146, Città del Vaticano,1949). On the culture of the Arab Christians in general, cf. Bernard Heyberger, Les Chrétiens du Proche-Orient au temps de la réforme catholique (Syrie, Liban, Palestine, XVIIe-XVIIIe siècles), (Rome, 1994), pp. 139ff. 3 On the history of the Antiochian patriarchate in the 17th century, cf. Joseph Nasrallah, Chronologie des Patriarches Melchites d’Antioche de 1500 à 1634, (Jerusalem, 1959 = Extrait de Proche-Orient Chrétien, 1956-1957); Asad Rustum, Kanisat madinat Allah An†akiyah al- ¨u†ma, al-guzˆ a†-†ali† (1453-1928), (Beirut, 1988); Îrisustumus Babadubulus, TariÌ kanisat An†akiyah, (Beirut, 1984). For the schism, cf. especially Heyberger, Les Chrétiens, pp. 225ff. and Abdallah Raheb, Conception de l'Union dans le patriarcat orthodoxe d'Antioche, 1622-1672, (Beirut, 1981). 578 BISHOPS AND METROPOLITANS OF THE ANTIOCHIAN PATRIARCHATE only the similarly increasing numbers of European diplomats and missionaries in the Levant, the probable increase in the number of visits of Oriental clerics to Europe for reasons of study, work, teaching and politics,4 and not least the journeys of some high ranking representatives of the Antiochian patriarchate to the bilad al-masiÌiyin, the Orthodox principalities and kingdoms in the Bal- kans, the Caucasus and Russia.5 Shortness of time obliges me to limit myself to just a few aspects. So after a brief description of the geographical extent of the Antiochian patriarchate in the 17th century, three main issues will be discussed. The first of these is the relations of the bishops with the local Muslim authorities. I will make no distinction between bishops and metropolitans, as the latter's rank was only one of honour and did not imply any real power over suffragans. The second is the contribution of the bishops to the cultural life and production of the Melkite community. The third is the ethnic origin of the different incumbents, which leads to the question of to what degree the patriarchate of Antioch was “Hellenized” or “Graecized” in the 17th cen- tury.

2. THE GEOGRAPHICAL EXTENT OF THE ANTIOCHIAN PATRIARCHATE IN THE 17th CENTURy

In a work on the saints of his patriarchate, Macarius ibn az-Za¨i¨m names as parts of the Antiochian diocese: “Antioch, , Arabia, I mean Îauran and its regions, Phoenicia which is Tripolis as-Sam, at-™agr which is Cilicia, I mean Adana and what belongs to it till the river Euphrates and [the city of] Edessa and all that is between the rivers and within that (region), I mean Amid [Diyarbakir], NuÒaibin and Babel and what be- longs to them with the Smaller and Greater Armenia and their dependencies with the Georgians and up to the extremities of the East…”6 By the days of Macarius (1647-1672) the time when the patriarch of Antioch was really the ecclesiastical master of “the whole east”, as his official

4 On the these relations between East and West, cf. Heyberger, Les Chrétiens, p. 183ff. 5 For the travels of Macarius Ibn az-Za¨im, cf. Basile Radu, (ed.), Voyage du Patriarche Macaire d’Antioche, (Patrologia Orientalis, XXII, fasc. 1; XXIV, fasc. 4; XXVI, fasc. 5, Paris, 1930; 1933; 1949); F. C. Belfour, (ed.), The Travels of Macarius, Patriarch of Antioch: Written by his Attendant Archdeacon, Paul of , in Arabic, Part the Third, The Cossack Country and Muscovy, (London, 1832); Qus†an†in al-Basa, (ed.), “NuÌbah min safrat al-ba†riyark Makariyus al-Îalabi bi-qalam waladihi as-sammas Bulus”, al-Masarrah, 3 (1912/13), pp. 81-88, 162-168, 212-222, 260-264, 418-464, 457-461, 500-506, 657-661, 739-747 and 4 (1913/14), pp. 168-178, 223-228, 253-261, 332-340, 369-373; Carsten-Michael Walbiner, Die Mitteilungen des griechisch-orthodoxen Patriarchen Makarius Ibn az-Za¨im von Antiochia (1647-1672) über Georgien nach dem arabischen Autograph von St. Petersburg, (Ph.D. thesis, Leipzig, 1994). 6 Ms. Rome, Apostolic Library, vat. ar. 622, fol. 1v. Cf. also Michel Abras, “Vie des saints d'Antioche de Makariyus Ibn al-Za¨im, Patriarche d'Antioche (1647-1672)”, Parole de l'Orient, 21 (1996), p. 288. C.M. WALBINER 579 title still suggests, was long past. With the exception of Payas, Erzerum and Diyarbakir, all episcopal sees of the patriarchate were then situated in the terri- tories of modern Lebanon and Syria. The number of bishoprics varied. In the 17th century we know of twenty, and in 1635 seventeen of them were occu- pied. Nearly every larger city of bilad as-Sam had its Melkite bishop, which is a clear indication of the urban concentration of the Melkites. The most impor- tant rural settlement areas were the Kurah of Tripoli and the Qalamun moun- tain north of Damascus. In the Qalamun region, the 17th century witnessed a decrease in the number of believers which led to the giving up of Qara as an episcopal see and to the irregular appointment of bishops to Ma¨lula and Yabrud.7 As far as the numbers of Melkites are concerned, we do not have reliable information. It seems, however, that 700 families were enough to justify and sustain a bishop, as was the case in the diocese of Erzerum.8

3. THE BISHOPS AND THEIR RELATIONS TO THE LOCAL MUSLIM AUTHORITIES

Bishops were elected by the patriarch, who very often followed the propos- als of the clergymen and the laity of the dioceses concerned. Approval of the Muslim authorities was – in contrast to the election of a patriarch – not needed. Nevertheless, the sources give evidence of occasional interference on the part of local rulers in the election of bishops. The semi-autonomous poten- tates of Lebanon, the banu Saifa in Tripolis and emir FaÌr ad-Din, exercised an influence on the ecclesiastical affairs of their Melkite subjects in the first decades of the 17th century.

The story of Joachim may serve as an example. He was elected some time after 1619 as metropolitan of Tripoli, the centre of the rule of the banu Saifa. Macarius Ibn az-Za¨im reports that it was Jacob, the brother of the mentioned Joachim, who prompted Ibn Saifa to make his brother metropolitan of the city. Jacob was – it seems – the personal physician to the ruler and enjoyed his con- fidence. The Pasha ordered the bishops of Hama, Homs and al-ÎiÒn to come to Tripoli and consecrate Joachim, which they did. This deed was, in the eyes of Macarius, “a violation of the law and not allowed, because it happened with- out a certificate of the patriarch.”9 As long as interests of the local powers were involved, however, the Christians could not do much against it. Calami- ties came for Joachim from another direction. When the troops of FaÌr ad-Din conquered Tripolis in 1624 and put an end to the rule of the banu Saifa,

7 Cf. Walbiner, “Die Bischofs- und Metropolitensitze”, pp. 134, 130f., 144f. 8 Cf. Walbiner, “Die Bischofs- und Metropolitensitze”, p. 121. 9 Cf. Walbiner, “Die Bischofs- und Metropolitensitze”, p. 142f. 580 BISHOPS AND METROPOLITANS OF THE ANTIOCHIAN PATRIARCHATE

Joachim had to flee. He took refuge in the monastery of Îama†urah, where he had been monk before his election as bishop. His opponents captured both him and the bishop of al-ÎiÒn, who had evidently also fled to that monastery. They handed them over to the soldiers of FaÌr ad-Din. Both prelates were then sent to Beirut, where they were imprisoned for 49 days. Finally they paid 200 and 100 piasters respectively, and were set free.10 How large the influence of FaÌr ad-Din was is illustrated by the fact that in 1628 he could order all bishops of the Antiochian patriarchate to assemble in Raas Baalbek for a synod. They were required to settle the dispute between two pretenders who were struggling for the patriarchal throne for 9 years. It is no surprise that their choice fell on Ignatius ¨A†iya, the protégé of FaÌr ad-Din.11 In earlier years, Ignatius had been secretary of the prince before he became metropolitan of Sidon, probably through the intervention of his master.12 The Ottoman governors, most of whom were in power for just a year or so, were not particularly interested in influencing church policy. Their main con- cern was making optimal profits. The bishops, as representatives of the weak second class Christian citizens, were vulnerable to financial exploitation and extortion, very often by the means of open violence. In 1647, Meletius Za¨im, the metropolitan of Aleppo, had to flee from the city by reason of the oppression and injustice of the governor Qurah Îasan Pasha, who resorted to blackmail and illegal taxation.13 In 1657 Gerasimus, the bishop of the patriarchal residence in Damascus, was imprisoned and tortured with a bastinado because he could not pay a sum which the Turks had demanded from him.14 In the face of these interferences, oppressions and extortions, the Christians were by and large powerless. It was not until the end of the 17th century that they could rely on effective help from the foreign consuls.15

4. SOME REMARKS ON THE CULTURAL ACTIVITIES OF THE BISHOPS

After centuries of decline at the beginning of the 17th century, science and the arts were very poorly developed amongst the Melkites. A rudimentary

10 ¨Isa Iskandar al-Ma¨luf, TariÌ al-amir FaÌr ad-Din al-Ma¨ni a†-†ani, (Beirut, 1966), pp. 191f. 11 On this synod, cf. al-Ma¨luf, TariÌ, pp. 194ff., Nasrallah, Chronologie, pp. 58ff. and Rustum, Kanisat An†akiyah, pp. 39ff. 12 Nasrallah, Chronologie, p. 56, n. 31. 13 Radu, Voyage (XXII/1), pp. 52f. 14 Antoine Rabbath, Documents inédits pour servir a l’histoire du christianisme en Orient (XVI-XIX siècle), vol. 2, (Paris/Leipzig, 1910), p. 260f. 15 Cf. Robert M. Haddad, Syrian Christians in Muslim Society, (Princeton, 1970), pp. 30f.; Abraham Marcus, The Middle East on the Eve of Modernity. Aleppo in the Eighteenth Century, (New York, 1989), pp. 46f.; Heyberger, Les Chrétiens, pp. 241ff. C.M. WALBINER 581 education was limited to the clergy. The bishops in particular were in the cen- tre of what might be called cultural activities. They taught the deacons and priests the basics of the Christian faith, copied manuscripts – mostly liturgical books – or encouraged and supervised others in doing so. Original works, even of poor quality, were very rare.16 In the course of the 17th century, however, the situation changed, and Mel- kite literature received a fresh impetus. This was mainly due to two factors: some outstanding figures amongst the bishops and patriarchs, and an increas- ing European influence, mainly exercised by missionaries arriving from the West.17 I would like to concentrate on the local pioneers of a literary revival amongst the Melkites, of whom I shall describe the three most eminent. It is surely not by chance that all three were metropolitans of Aleppo and later be- came patriarchs of Antioch. Aleppo was “a major market for the exchange of Ottoman and European goods.”18 Many Christians were involved in the European trade, from which they benefited greatly, both financially and intellectually. The town became the centre of European commercial, diplomatic and missionary activities in bilad as-Sam. This could not leave the intellectual life in Aleppo, and espe- cially that of the Christian inhabitants, untouched. The credit for having been the initiator of an intellectual renewal amongst the Melkites belongs by right to Meletius Karmah. Karmah, a local cleric from Hamah, became metropolitan of Aleppo in 1612. Earlier, he had stayed in the monastery of St. Sabas near Jerusalem for some years, where he gained a Greek education. As bishop, his efforts were aimed mainly at the correction and standardisation of the liturgical books of his church.19 His disciple and bi- ographer Macarius ibn az-Zaim tells us: “He recognised that the heretics had sown their bad weed in some books and he immediately set about eliminating it. With great trouble he rendered the Divine Service book, the Euchologion, the Horologion and other books from Greek, into Arabic, and he blessed the churches with them.”20 16 Cf. the literature given in note 2; for the state of education, see also Qus†an†in al-Basa, TariÌ †aˆifat ar-rum al-malikiyah wa-r-rahbaniyah al-muÌalliÒiyah, vol. 1, (Sidon, 1938), pp. 17ff. 17 On the activity of the European missions, see Heyberger, Les Chrétiens, pp. 225ff., 338ff., 433ff., 453ff. For the literary activities of the missionaries in Arabic, see Georg Graf, Geschichte der christlichen arabischen Literatur, Vierter Band: Die Schriftsteller von der Mitte des 15. bis zum Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts (Syrer, Armenier, Kopten, Missionsliteratur, Profanliteratur), (Studi e Testi, 147, Città del Vaticano,1951), pp. 169ff. 18 Marcus, The Middle East, p. 149. 19 On the life and work of Meletius/Euthymius Karmah, see Naufi†uÒ Idlibi (Neophytos Edelby), Asaqifat ar-rum al-malikiyin bi-Îalab, (Aleppo, 1983), pp. 31ff.; Graf, Geschichte, vol. 3, pp. 91ff.; and Nasrallah, Histoire, pp. 70ff. 20 Laundiyus Kilzi, (ed.), “Îaiyat al-ba†riyark Aftimiyus Karmah al-An†aki al-Îamawi bi- qalam tilmi∂ihi al-ba†riyark Makariyus al-Îalabi”, al-Masarrah 4 (1913), pp. 85ff. 582 BISHOPS AND METROPOLITANS OF THE ANTIOCHIAN PATRIARCHATE

Between 1612 and 1633, Karmah translated half a dozen liturgical books into Arabic. He was well aware of the problematical nature of his task. Count- less versions of very different quality were in use among the faithful, so he made great efforts to collect as many of them as possible in order to have a broad textual basis for his own version. He did not hesitate to seek the assist- ance of learned men, regardless of their confessional affiliation. Amongst the scholars he admired and invited for collaboration were Tommaso Obicini from Novara, the Guardian of the Franciscans in the Holy Land,21 and Caspar al- Garib, a Maronite from Cyprus.22 Karmah clearly grasped the possibilities which book-printing offered for the diffusion of his translations. Ceaselessly, but without success, he tried to con- vince the Vatican to print the Horologion and the Euchologion.23 Karmah worked not only as a translator, also becoming known as an author of religious and historical treatises and as a copyist.24 In addition, he was a promoter of visual art. He invited Meletius aÒ-∑aqizi (i.e. the Chiot), an icon- painter and monk from the monastery of St. Sabas near Jerusalem, to come to Aleppo and enhance its churches with his pictures.25 By teaching his art to some locals, especially the priest Joseph al-MuÒauwir, aÒ-∑aqizi became the founder of what is known as the Aleppine school of painters.26 As teacher, Karmah has done important things. He gathered a large circle of disciples whom he taught and encouraged in their own literary and scientific work. Among them were Michael Baga¨, who himself became the teacher of the Melkite youth of Aleppo,27 the afore mentioned Joseph al-MuÒauwir who also worked as a translator,28 and Macarius – in those days still John – ibn az- Za¨im, about whom I shall soon speak in some detail. Karmah encouraged the Jesuits to open a school in Aleppo, which they did in 1629.29 It was the first school the Christians obtained in Syria in modern times. 21 On this missionary and scholar, see Graf, Geschichte, vol. 4, p. 174ff. and Giovanni- Claudio Bottini, “Tommaso Obicini (1585-1632) – Custos of the Holy Land and Orientalist”, in Anthony O'Mahony, (ed.), The Christian Heritage in the Holy Land, (London, 1995), pp. 97ff. 22 Cf. a letter from Karmah to the “Propaganda Fide” in Rome, written on October 4th, 1623 (Historical Archive of the “Propaganda Fide”, SOCG 181, fol. 36v). 23 Cf. Idlibi, Asaqifat, p. 47; Qus†an†in al-Basa, “Rasaˆil qadimah li-l-ba†riyark al-an†aki Af†imiyus Karmah al-Îamawi”, ar-Risalah al-muÌalliÒiyah, 5 (1938), pp. 315, 317, 319f. and Wahid Gdoura, Le Début de l'Imprimerie Arabe à et en Syrie: Evolution de l'Environment Culturel (1706-1787), (Tunis, 1985), pp. 49ff. 24 Cf. the literature cited in note 19. 25 Macarius Ibn az-Za¨im, SarÌ asami ba†arikat madinat Allah An†akiyah mun∂u ¨ahd al- qiddis mar Bu†rus ar-rasul auwal ba†arikatiha ila zamanina ha∂a, Ms. St. Petersburg, Institute for Oriental Studies, B 1227, p. 188; Radu, Voyage (XXII/1), p. 42. 26 Idlibi, Asaqifat, p. 36. 27 On Baga¨, see Nasrallah, Histoire, 249ff.; Graf, Geschichte, vol. 3, pp. 191f. 28 On the literary activities of al-MuÒauwir, see Nasrallah, Histoire, pp. 206ff. and Graf, Geschichte, p. 113. 29 Cf. Heyberger, Les Chrétiens, pp. 392, 455. C.M. WALBINER 583

By the time that Karmah died in 1635, he had set in motion an intellectual movement that was rooted in Greek cultural assets but which also respected the Antiochian tradition and was open to new influences from the West. His work was carried on by his disciples, of whom Macarius Ibn az-Za¨im was the most important and influential. Macarius, who was consecrated metro- politan of Aleppo in 1635, and patriarch of Antioch twelve years later, became the most prolific author of the Melkites in the 17th century.30 His literary herit- age comprises dozens of minor and major treatises, which cover almost all major fields of Christian Arabic writings.31 Although Macarius composed most of his works after becoming patriarch, his first activities can be traced back to his time as metropolitan. Thus he tells us in his kitab an-NaÌlah (The Book of the Bee): “Know that when I was metropolitan of the city of Aleppo I sent out and collected from all regions all the legends of the Saints who are (honored) on the (various) days of the year. I wrote down everything I found from their legends and donated them to the church of Aleppo and the metropolitate.”32 Apart from hagiography, Macarius was especially interested in the history of the patriarchate of Antioch,33 as we learn from his introduction to the Arabic translation of a Greek chronicle. Macarius says: “I, the humble Macarius, […] was, when I was metropolitan of Aleppo […] tireless, to read her [Antioch's] documents in the form of chronicles […] and I decided to translate them myself into Ara- bic.”34 At the time (1647/48), his many duties and his “continuous interest in the guidance of the parish” prevented Macarius from doing the translation by himself.35 He therefore entrusted the work to the priest Joseph al-MuÒauwir and his son, the archdeacon Paul of Aleppo.36 Both translators belonged to those personalities who were closely connected with the intellectual renewal amongst the Melkites in Aleppo. Already as met- ropolitan, Macarius played a central role in this movement, but more as a

30 On his life, see Walbiner, Mitteilungen, pp. 8ff. and Idlibi, Asaqifat, pp. 57ff., 81ff. 31 For his work, see Nasrallah, Histoire, pp. 87ff.; Graf, Geschichte, 94ff. and Walbiner, Mitteilungen, pp. 29ff. 32 Ms. Homs, Greek orthodox Metropolitate, 27, fol. 68a. 33 On Macarius' historical work, see Nasrallah, Histoire, pp. 90ff., Idem, “L’Œuvre historique du patriarche d’Antioche Macaire III Za¨im”, BEO, XXV (1972), p. 191ff. and Carsten-Michael Walbiner, “Makarius Ibn az-Za¨im als Historiker: Anliegen – Arbeitsweise – Ergebnisse”, in Holger Preissler and Heidi Stein (eds.), Annäherung an das Fremde, (Stuttgart, 1998), pp. 155-163. 34 Victor Rosen, Notices sommaires des manuscrits arabes du Musée Asiatique, (St. Petersburg, 1881), p. 137. 35 Ibid. It seems, furthermore, that Macarius was still ignorant of literary Greek at this time, so that he could hardly have taken upon himself the task of translation. (Cf. Îabib az-Zaiyat, “Muqaddimat kitab riÌlat al-ba†riyark Makariyus ila l-bilad al-masiÌiyah li-s-sammas Bulus az- Za¨im al-ma¨ruf bi-l-Îalabi”, al-Machriq, 5 (1902), p. 1016.) 36 Rosen, Notices, p. 137; cf. also Îalid ar-Raiyan, Fihris mău†at dar al-kutub al-Åahi- riyah – at-tariÌ wa-mulÌaqatuhu, al-guzˆ a†-†ani, (Damascus, 1973), p. 239. 584 BISHOPS AND METROPOLITANS OF THE ANTIOCHIAN PATRIARCHATE stimulator, promoter and patron. It was later that he became famous as a scholar and author.37 The third person I'd like to mention is Athanasius ad-Dabbas. He was born in the middle of the 17th century in Damascus, where he was educated by the Jesuits. Later on he became a monk in the monastery of St. Sabas near Jerusa- lem. In 1685 he was put forward as antipatriarch against Cyrillus ibn az-Za¨im. After nine years of endless struggle, Athanasius gave up his claims. In return he received the most important diocese of the patriarchate – that of Aleppo. He remained its metropolitan until 1720, when his opponent Cyrillus died, and Athanasius succeeded to the patriarchate for four years until his own death.38 Athanasius became known as an author of historical and religious treatises, and he acted as a translator and as a patron of literary and artistic activities.39 He was the most distinguished personage amongst the Melkites of Aleppo at the beginning of the 18th century, a period when the repeatedly mentioned in- tellectual upswing reached its peak. The town became the starting point for far-reaching monastic reforms within the Maronite and Melkite churches, and together with Sidon it was the centre of the Uniate movement. Aleppo also be- came the cradle of Arabic book-printing in the masriq. She gained this title of honour thanks to the efforts of her metropolitan, Athanasius ad-Dabbas. In 1700 Athanasius travelled to Wallachia to pay a visit to his friend, the ruling Prince Constantin Brancoveanul. Responding to Athanasius' wish, in 1701 Constantin established an Arab printing press at the monastery of Snagov near Bucharest. Here a Georgian monk printed a liturgical book in Arabic and Greek, in the very same year. The press was then moved to Bucharest, where a second book was published in 1702.40 Before Athanasius left Wallachia for Aleppo in 1704, he was given the printing-press as a present. He took it with him to Aleppo, where printing-activity started under his guidance in 1706. The press – the first one to print Arabic books in the Arab world – survived until 1711 and produced eleven books. It was here that Abdallah Zakher – the pio- neer of book-printing in Lebanon – learned his trade.41 These examples make clear the important role certain Melkite metropolitans played during the intellectual renewal amongst the Christians of bilad as-Sam in the 17th century. The sources and reasons for this renewal have not been studied thoroughly yet, but one cannot fail to notice the remarkable affinity with Greek culture in literature as well as in art. 37 Cf. Idlibi, Asaqifat, pp. 67f. 38 On the life of Athanasius, see Idlibi, Asaqifat, pp. 107ff. 39 On the literary work of Athansius, see Nasrallah, Histoire, pp. 132ff. and Graf, Geschichte, pp. 127ff. 40 On Arabic book-printing in Romania, see Gdoura, Le Début, pp. 133ff. and Dan Simonescu, “Impression des livres arabes et karamanlis en Valachie et en Moldavie au XVIIIe siècle”, SAO, V-VI (1967), pp. 49ff. 41 On the printing press of Aleppo, see Gdoura, Le Début, pp. 138ff. and Idlibi, Asaqifat, pp. 116ff. C.M. WALBINER 585

5. THE ETHNIC ORIGINS OF THE BISHOPS

This leads me to the last question of my paper, that of the ethnic origins of the bishops. To demonstrate that this question is of greatest importance for modern historiography and the conception of history in the region, it is appro- priate to cite a long passage from Kamal Salibi's A house of many mansions. Mr. Salibi writes: “It was actually among the Christian Arabs of Syria – not the Maronites but the Melchites of Aleppo – that a rudimentary consciousness of Arabism first developed in modern times. As Christians, the Melchites followed the Greek rite. Under the Ottomans, their church in Syria had come to be controlled by a Greek upper clergy, under the influence of the Phanariot Greeks of Istanbul who were close to the centre of political power. Though following the same rite as the Greeks, and paying special regard to the Phanariot Patriarch of Con- stantinople as the head of the ecumenical Orthodox church, the Melchites were strictly an indigenous Syrian church whose head was the titular Patriarch of Antioch residing in Damascus. There was also the Melchite church of Jerusa- lem, headed by its own patriarch. By tradition however, both patriarchs, and also most of the bishops who served under them, were Greeks. Few Arab cler- gymen in either church, under these conditions, could aspire to be anything more than priests. By the late seventeenth century there were many Melchites in the church of Antioch who were beginning to find the situation intoler- able.”42 And so – in the opinion of Mr. Salibi – Greek dominance over the church of Antioch was an important reason for the schism of 1724.43 But is it really true that “by tradition” the patriarch and the higher clergy in the patriarchate of Antioch were Greeks? Although the patriarchs are not of interest here, it should be remembered that throughout the whole 17th century (and even as late as the schism of 1724), only two Greeks gained patriarchal dignity. The first was Euthymius aÒ-∑aqizi (1635-1647), the above-mentioned icon-painter. His Arab teacher and predecessor, Euthymius Karmah, designated aÒ-∑aqizi as his successor in his last will. Neither the clergy nor the laity found his nomination and election in any way objectionable.44 The second Greek on the patriarchal throne was Neophytus aÒ-∑aqizi, the nephew of Euthymius, who was anti-patriarch to Cyrillus Ibn az-Za¨im from 1672 till 1684.45 Neither prelate can be accused of having pursued the Hellenization or Graecization of the Antiochian patriar-

42 Kamal Salibi, A House of Many Mansions. The History of Lebanon Reconsidered, (Berkeley/Los Angeles/London, 1988), p. 42. 43 Salibi, A House, p. 43. 44 Cf. Macarius Ibn az-Za¨im, SarÌ, p. 188; Radu, Voyage, p. 42f. On the life of Euthymius, see Nasrallah, Histoire, p. 86f. and Asad Rustum, Kanisat madinat Allah An†akiyah al-¨u†ma, al- guzˆ a†-†ali† (1453-1928), (Beirut, 1988), pp. 45f. 45 On his life, see Nasrallah, Histoire, pp. 128f. and Rustum, Kanisat, pp. 104ff. 586 BISHOPS AND METROPOLITANS OF THE ANTIOCHIAN PATRIARCHATE chate. Both maintained good relations with the Catholic missionaries, and out of the 12 bishops who were consecrated by Euthymius aÒ-∑aqizi, only one was Greek.46 As far as the bishops are concerned from the beginning of the 17th century until its final decade, we know about 94 of them.47 Of those, 74 were Arab, eleven Greek, six local (mainly people from the region of Erzerum who be- came metropolitans of that town), and three were of unknown origin.48 These sheer numbers alone are sufficient to counter the claim concerning the Hellenization of the Antiochian hierarchy in the 17th century. Let us never- theless have a closer look at these eleven Greek prelates, and especially the question as to who made them bishops. The first is Zacharias from Cyprus, the former abbot of the monastery of St. Jacob outside Tripoli, who became the last metropolitan of Apamea. Conse- crated by Ignatius ¨A†iyah (1611-1619), he left his see after a while (before 1628) and went to , where he learned the Georgian language, and preached and taught the people there.49 Epiphanius, a Greek from the region of Thessalonika, received his consecra- tion as metropolitan of Amid (which is now Diyarbakr) from Athanasius Dabbas I. Eventually there came to be differences between him and his parish which led Epiphanius to leave for Constantinople, whose patriarch gave him the diocese of Caesarea in Cappadocia.50 Pachomius aÒ-∑aqizi was consecrated metropolitan of ∑aidnaya by Euthy- mius aÒ-∑aqizi (or “the Greek”, as he is also called in the sources). Euthymius Karmah had sent him to Rome in 1634 to deliver the manuscripts of Karmah's Arabic translations of Greek liturgical books, which were to be printed in Rome. Among the reasons why the task of this mission was entrusted to Pachomius was the fact that he knew both Greek and Arabic very well. Pachomius is also known as the copyist of at least one Arabic manuscript. The Propaganda Fide in Rome thought of Pachomius as a friend of the Catholics.51 Neophytus aÒ-Saqizi was a disciple of the Jesuits in Damascus. In 1661 he was consecrated metropolitan of Hama by Macarius Ibn az-Za¨im52, and as mentioned above he later became anti-patriarch for 12 years. While patriarch, Neophytus consecrated his nephew Joachim metropolitan of Tripoli.53

46 This was Pachomius aÒ-∑aqizi, who was consecrated metropolitan of Saidnaya by Euthymius; cf. below. 47 Incumbents who held several sees at the same time are only counted once. 48 Cf. Walbiner, “Die Bischofs- und Metropolitensitze” and Ms. St. Petersburg, Institute for Oriental Studies, B 1227, pp. 66-77 (marginal notes by Cyrillus Ibn az-Za‘im). 49 Cf. Walbiner, “Die Bischofs- und Metropolitensitze”, p. 112. 50 Cf. Walbiner, “Die Bischofs- und Metropolitensitze”, p. 118. 51 Cf. Walbiner, “Die Bischofs- und Metropolitensitze”, pp. 137ff. 52 Cf. Walbiner, “Die Bischofs- und Metropolitensitze”, p. 124. 53 Ms. St. Petersburg, Institute for Oriental Studies, B 1227, p. 70 (marginal note by Cyrillus Ibn az-Za¨im). C.M. WALBINER 587

His opponent as patriarch, Cyrillus Za¨im, consecrated three Greek bishops: Timotheus the Cypriot for Hamah,54 Gennadius, his deacon, who was also from Cyprus, for Aleppo,55 Parthenius, another Cypriot, for Baalbek,56 and Ignatius from Chios, who was a deacon of Neophytus, for Lattakia.57 Ignatius became the direct successor of his master Neophytus, who had, after the final failure of his claims for the patriarchate, been metropolitan of Lattakia for four years.58 Athanasius Dabbas II consecrated Neophytus from Cyprus metropolitan of Payas.59 As can be seen, only two of these ten bishops were consecrated by a Greek fellow-countryman. There is no sign of any interference by the see of Constan- tinople in these consecrations. None of these prelates pursued the aim of Hellenization and, on the contrary, some of them tried to strengthen the Arab cultural identity of their flocks. It thus became obvious that there was no Greek domination of the Antiochian patriarchate at all before the end of the 17th century. The question of a Hellenization of the hierarchy cannot be put before the schism of 1724. When Constantinople, beginning at that time, tried to take over control in the patriarchate of Antioch, it has to be seen as a reaction to the schism and not as a reason for it. It is also the case that in the 18th century, the mere fact that a bishop (or a patriach) was Greek did not automatically mean that he was anti- Arab. In this connection thorough studies of the deeds and attitudes of the dif- ferent incumbents are required.

ABBREVIATIONS

BEO: Bulletin d'Etudes Orientales, (Damascus) SAO: Studia et acta orientalia, (Bucharest)

54 Ms. St. Petersburg, Institute for Oriental Studies, B 1227, p. 72 (marginal note by Cyrillus Ibn az-Za¨im). 55 Ms. St. Petersburg, Institute for Oriental Studies, B 1227, p. 66 (marginal note by Cyrillus Ibn az-Za¨im). 56 Ms. St. Petersburg, Institute for Oriental Studies, B 1227, p. 69 (marginal note by Cyrillus Ibn az-Za‘im. 57 Ms. St. Petersburg, Institute for Oriental Studies, B 1227, p. 72 (marginal note by Cyrillus Ibn az-Za¨im). 58 Ibid. 59 Ms. St. Petersburg, Institute for Oriental Studies, B 1227, p. 73 (marginal note by Cyrillus Ibn az-Za¨im).