Armenians in Contact with Islam Seventh to Fourteenth Centuries Seta

ARMENIANS IN CONTACT WITH ISLAM

SEVENTH TO FOURTEENTH CENTURIES

SETA B. DADOYAN

Less than two decades after the rise of Islam, Armenians were exposed to and interacted with cultural and political Islam in most intriguing manners. The exposition, classification and analysis of these patterns of interaction is the subject of this paper (which is in fact the abstract of a book in progress). The geographical area under study covers Greater Armenia, Upper Meso- potamia, Bilad al-Sham and Egypt during the period from the eighth century to the end of the fourteenth. The historic record of over seven centuries of Islamic-Armenian relations is available though scattered, but this ongoing reality never developed into an academic discipline both in Armenology and Near Eastern studies in general. The surprisingly dynamic and rich texture of Islamic-Armenian interaction resists rigid classifications however, a broad distinction must be made, as this paper does, between Armenian interactions with political Islam on the one hand and the manners in which Armenians saw and interacted with cultural-doctrinal Islam, on the other. Gathering and organizing available data, then reconstructing the patterns or ‘models’ of interaction are tasks of this initial phase of Islamic-Armenian history (for the initiation of which the author of these lines modestly claims credit). What I call ‘historic models’ are specific yet generalizable instances in which Armenians interacted with political and cultural Islam as their immediate environment, both within and without their establishment. Medieval histories constitute the record of Islamic-Armenian interactions and in this context, Islamic sources present particular significance. Because, what they called Arminia extended from the Black Sea to North Syria and from the Caspian to Cappadocia. It covered Armenia proper or Greater Arme- nia, VirÈ (Georgia) and AghvanÈ (Albania). As an administrative unit, it was divided into four areas: the First Arminia was AghvanÈ, the Second VirÈ, the Third the eastern part of Greater Armenia and the Fourth its western part. 176 S.B. DADOYAN

Concerning the ‘Armenians’ or al-arman, I would like to propose the following: Arab historians and geographers used the words arman and armani to refer equally to those who were natives of this region and those who lived in and out of it. Similar to the word ‘Arab’, the term armani was extra-religious, extra-national and extra-local. Consequently, being broader in their outlook, Islamic accounts reflected more vivid images of the diffused and dynamic patterns of the political careers and cultures of the Armenians in the Islamic world, which practically included Armenia too. More impor- tantly, Arminia and al-arman were dealt with and presented as indigenous elements of the Near East and the narratives did not single them out of the general historic texture. This is why historic truth is to be found on the crossroads of Arab and Armenian sources; often a complex and synthetic method is necessary to shed some light on what may be called ‘historic black holes’ in Armenian histories. This paper treats the Armenian experience with Islam as a singularity and in doing so it proposes a philosophically distinct historic vision and a new methodology to draw criteria for a systemic study of the historicity of Islamic- Armenian interactions. The few Armeno-Arab studies are restricted to the period of Arab rule (approximately from 636-885, from the Islamic conquests of Arminia to the rise of the Bagratunis, the third dynasty). For these authors Islam is simply the religion of the Arabs. In turn, historiography of the later periods reduces Islam to part of the ethnicity of the Turks, Mongols, Persians, Kurds, etc. But Islam as a world was never studied as a vast culture which in fact constituted a good part of the realities the Armenians and other peoples of the Near East interacted with in most intriguing manners.

POLITICAL ISLAM AND THE ARMENIANS

Arab rule in Armenia and the penetration of Islam By a treaty in 652, between Omayyad Caliph Mu‘awiyah and Theodorus Rshtuni, the latter became ‘Prince of Armenia’ (Hayots Iskhan) and to the end of the first phase of Arab rule around 701,1 the country enjoyed a measure of

1 Arab rule in Armenia had four phases: Early unstable period: 636-701; Direct administration: 701-885; Semi- independence with taxes: 885-913; Independence with a gradual halt of taxes by Ashot Yerka† (915-928). See A. Alboyajian, Batmu†yun Îay Gagh†akanu†yan [History of Armenian Emigrations], I (Cairo, 1941). The Armenian sources on the period of Arab domination are: Sebeos, Movses Kaghankatuatsi, Ghevond, ARMENIANS IN CONTACT WITH ISLAM 177 internal sovereignty. Armenians faced Islam directly and as a cultural-political alternative ally, only after Arminia became an administrative unit under Arab governors (who resided in Dvin then in Bardav as of 789). This condi- tion was created by the location of Armenia between East and West, first Roman/Persian then Byzantine/Islamic and as in the past, during Arab rule too, there were pro-Western and pro-Eastern trends. During the first century of Arab rule, the choices the Armenians made – as clergy, aristocracy, dissident factions and individuals –, decided the course of events and drew the destiny of the nation. The Armenian Church always sided with the Christian West, despite serious disagreement following the Council of Chalcedon and despite the consistently unfavourable attitude of Byzantium towards Armenian sovereignty. However, the Omayyads maintained cordial relations and it was with their assistance that Chalcedonianism was banned in Armenia by Catholicos Yeghya Arjishetsi (703-777); Hovhan Oznetsi (d. 728) was in good terms with the court at Damascus. Some aristocratic Houses and mainly the Bagratunis pursued pro-Eastern and generally more flexible policies, which allowed and justified cooperation with the Arabs. The most prominent elements in the pro-Eastern camp were the various social and religious dissidents or the sectarians, which became the permanent allies of the Muslims. In contrast, the Mamikonian House was a prominent example of pro-Greek and nationalistic trends, it led major uprisings against the Omayyads (703 and 747-750). Two greater revolts happened in 774-5 and around 850 because of high taxes; they were encountered by very heavy Arab reprisals and several nakharars moved to the Byzantine side, thus indirectly con- tributing to the settlement of Arab Tribal Emirates, like Shaybanis, Sulaymis or Qaysits, Uthmanis, ZaÌÌafis, Zuraris, etc. They were eventually eradi- cated by the Greeks in the eleventh century but it was the Kurdish element, not the Armenians, that replaced them. Intermarriages between the Arab Amirs and daughters of the Bagratunis, Mamikonians and ArÂrunis were not uncommon and granted the former hereditary rights. During the Abbasid-Greek wars, some Armenian generals in the Byzantine army joined the Arab side and occupied high administrative positions; one such example is Tajat Anzevatsi who became governor of Armenia in 781-785. In the midst of Arab-Greek wars, Armenian uprisings, large scale devasta- tion of the land and the population and consecutive governors there were many Armenians in the Abbasid army and the administration. In addition 178 S.B. DADOYAN to minor names, there is a major figure who played a very important role: he was YaÌya al-Armani, a general and governor of Egypt previously and of Armenia in 862. He was instrumental in the end of Arab rule by the procla- mation of Ashot I Bagratuni as Prince of Princes during his term. Practically direct Arab rule over Armenia lasted from 701 to 862. Eventually the Bagratunis founded the third Armenian dynasty in 885 by a crown sent by Caliph Mu‘tamid to Ashot Bagratuni I. In early 1960’s the Arabic seal of Ashot I was discovered during the excavations of Dvin.2

Contacts through social-religious dissidence of the Armenian sects The Paulicians - By the first years of the eighth century, channels of interaction with Islam were established through the cooperation which developed between the Arabs and the Paulician ‘heretics’, because of social and religious dissidence. Thus, as of the second decade of the eighth century, the Armenian sects were also accused of Islamic sympathies in addition to pagan and other unorthodox beliefs. Considering the Paulicians of his time, remnants of the early Christian sects, Catholicos Hovhan Oznetsi (term: 717-728) says that they shrewdly struck an “alliance with the oppressors [Muslims]… finding in them weapons to bring evils upon the Christians … They [the Paulicians] even studied the false and obscure scriptures [of the Muslims] and instructed ignorant followers in these teachings … [therefore] it comes as no surprise to us to see them sharing similar notions with those whose satellites they were”.3 While Byzantine persecutions and deportations drove the dissidents to the side of the Arabs, encounters with the latter politicized them and offered an alternative culture. In the year 717 they became the “auxiliaries of the Kingdom of the Tayaye”, Michael the Syrian says4 and inhabiting the marcher regions they took part in the Arab-Byzantine wars, until their strongholds in Tephrike and Arcaous were devastated in 872 by Basil I the Macedonian (867-886).

Hovhannes Patmaban Catholicos, ™ovma ArÂruni, Steπannos Asoghik, Ukh†anes, Aris- takes Lastivertsi. 2 A. Ter Ghevondian, The Arab Emirates in Armenia (Yerevan, 1965), p. 29. 3 Hovhannes Oznetsi, Hovhannu Imatasiri Avznetsvo Matenagru†yunk, ‘Norin Enddem Pavghikeants', ‘Norin Enddem Yerevutakanats’ [ Writings ‘Against the Paulicians’, ‘Against the Phantasiasts’] (Venice, St. Lazar, 1833), pp. 34-35. See also the Canons issued from the Council of Dvin, summoned in 719 in Arsen Gheldejian, Kanongirk Hayots [Book of Armenian Canons] (Tbilisi, 1913), pp. 148-149. 4 Michael the Syrian, Chronique de Michel le Syrien, ed. and French trans. J.B. Chabot (Paris, 1899-1910), II, p. 482. Also see B. Sargissian, Usumnasiri†yun ManiÈea-Pavghilkean ARMENIANS IN CONTACT WITH ISLAM 179

Along with the rise of a national establishment, this new phase was also marked by the failure of the Islamic-Paulician alliance before Basil I (867-886). A century later, Nicephor Phocas and John Tsimisces found a defensive enemy before them and reached Palestine. Started by Basil II (976-1025) in 1021 the project of annexing Armenia was completed by the fall of the Bagratids in 1045; the nation was driven to the west and south and the whole eastern region of Asia Minor was opened before the Turkomans. Ani was taken in 1063 and the fall of Manazkert in 1071 changed the destiny of the peoples and countries of the Middle East. During the following period, that is between 1045 and the rise of the fourth dynasty in Cilicia (1098-1375), most of the Armenians lived in the midst of the Islamic world and their involvement in its politics reached unprecedented levels.

The ™onrakians and Esoteric Islam – Just as heretical Islam was at once politically dissident and culturally syncretistic, ninth-century ™onrakism too was a refusal of the Armeno-Byzantine establishment and a powerful manifesta- tion of cultural syncretism. Linking with the ba†ini or esoteric Irano-Islamic trends5 and the Isma‘ilis in particular.6 It was W. Ivanow who first suggested that Paulicianism was one of the elements which constituted the doctrines of Ahl-i Îaqq or the Truth-Worshippers of Kurdistan of the twelfth century. There are “strong and comparatively recent traces of Christian beliefs, he

™onraketsineru Aghandin yev Grigor Narekatsvo ™ugh†e [A Study of the Manichaean-Pauli- cian-™onrakian Sect and the Epistle of Grigor of Narek] (Venice, 1893), p. 54. 5 Grigor Pahlavuni, the Byzantine Magistros of Mesopotamia and Vaspurakan, who persecuted them between the years 1051 and 1054, says that ™onrakian heresiarch Smbat had acquired his heresy from a “majusi astrologer-physician-priest”. See Grigor Magistros, ‘Letter to the Syrian Catholicos’, in Epistles, ed., introd. and notes K. Kostaniants (Alexan- drapol, 1910), p. 153. See also S.B. Dadoyan, The Fatimid Armenians: Cultural and Polit- ical Interaction in the Near East (Leiden, 1997), p. 57. Also see Grigor Narekatsi, ‘Letter to the Abbot of the Order of Kjav’; Poghos of Taron, Matenadaran MS #5787, f. 294b; partial trans. in F.C. Conybeare, Key of Truth (Oxford, 1898), Appendix viii. In his accounts of ™onrakian unrest in Mananaghi, Aristakes too ascribed majusi training to heresiarch Kunzik. See Aristakes Lastivertsi, Patmu†yun [History], trans., ed. and notes V.D. Gevorgian (Yerevan, 1971), p. 91. 6 The significance of the phrase “majusi astrologer-physician” can only be traced in the context of Aleppine history of the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Ibn al-‘Adim described the Isma‘ili missionaries, or the Ba†ini da’is in Aleppo as “Persian astrologer-physicians”. See Ibn al-‘Adim, Kamal ed-din Abu’l-Qasim ‘Umar Ibn AÌmad Ibn Hibat Allah, Zubdat al-Îalab min Tarikh Îalab, vol. II, ed. and notes Sami al-Dahhan (Damascus, 1951), 180 S.B. DADOYAN says, which may perhaps be recognized as akin to the Paulician or Thontraki sectarianism in Upper Mesopotamia and Armenia in the medieval period”.7

Cultural syncretism and Akritic or ‘twin-born’ careers Perhaps the most natural yet intriguing model of interactions was embodied in digenes or ‘twin-born’ synthetic identities on the marcher regions between the Muslim East and the Christian West. The peculiarity of the phenomenon escaped or was left out of the criteria of medieval histories but popular imagination captured it in the tenth century Epic of Digenes Akrites. In medieval Armenian literature there is a conspicuous silence about sectarian history and popular cultures of the ninth and tenth centuries, but the mem- ory of leaders like Carbeas, Chrysocheir and life in the border regions of the two empires survived in this epic.8 The characters in the epic of Digenes Akrites, the geographical locations and the events contain a good deal of surprisingly accurate historical data. “All the identifiable figures in the poem are connected by family and by locality to a Paulician milieu.”9 “Everybody mentioned in the poem was more or less an Armenian”.10 The heroes were well known Paulician leaders described in the epic as ‘Muslims’11 and between Islam and Christianity they moved by easy conversions, because their syncretistic identities easily accepted Islam as part of their ethos.

p. 147. Also see Ashot HovÌannesian, ‘Smbat Zarehavantsi: Nra Jamankn u Jamanakak- itsnere’ [Smbat of Zarehavan: His times and Contemporaries], Banber Matenadarani, 3 (1956), pp. 7-30. For the ™onrakian and Babakian collaboration see Movses of Kaghankatuk (or Daskhuran), History of the Caucasian Albanians, trans, ed. C.F.J. Dowsett (London,1961). See also a modern East-Armenian ed., trans. and notes Varag A®aÈelian (Yerevan, 1969) [Movses Kaghankatvatsi, Patmu†yun Aghvanits Ashkharhi]. 7 W. Ivanow, The Truth-Worshippers of Kurdistan and Ahl-i Haqq: Texts (Leiden, 1953), p. 32. 8 First published in 1875: Les exploits de Basile Digénis Acritas: Epopée byzantine du di- xième siècle, ed. C. Sathas et E. Legrand (Paris, 1875); Digenes Akrites, ed., trans. and notes J. Mavrogordato (Oxford,1956). See also Î.M. BartiÈian, ‘Buzandakan Digenis Akritas vipergu†yune yev nra nshanaku†yune Ìayagitu†yan Ìamar’ [The Byzantine Epic of Digenis Akritas and its significance in Armenology], Patma-Banasirakan Handes, 3 (1963), pp. 185-194, on p. 185. 9 Mavrogordato, Introduction to Digenes Akrites (see n. 8), p. xiv. 10 Ibid., p. lxviii. 11 Î.M. BartiÈian, ‘Notes sur l'épopée byzantine Digenis Akritas’, Revue des Etudes Arméniennes, Nouvelle Série, 3 (1966), pp. 147-166. ARMENIANS IN CONTACT WITH ISLAM 181

Life on the marcher regions was a manner of existence that simultaneously absorbed differences as well as affinities and generated a unique cultural disposition which by its origin perhaps, was bound to be ‘unorthodox’ on two sides of the borders. But both the Islam and the Christianity of these ‘heretical’ Armenians had lost their doctrinal exclusivity and evolved into a spirituality broad enough to contain the religious cultures of the region from Zoroastrianism to Christian mysticism.

A historic figure Amir Ktrij - One of the rarest recorded historic examples of the akritic pattern of interaction is a certain Amir Ktrij-Arisighi, the leader of the Nawikis in Asia Minor (first mentioned in the context of operations against al-Basasiri in the year 1059/451).12

The Armenian intermezzo in Bilad al-Sham If initial interactions developed through religious-political dissidence and originated syncretistic identities among the akritic factions, the next phase was marked by the adoption of Islam. The phenomenon of Muslim Arme- nians is the least investigated yet the most intriguing subject in the history of Armenians in the medieval Near East. As the consequence of Byzantine policy to recover the lands it had lost to the Arabs and settling Armenians in their locations, the nation was brought from the peripheries of the Islamic world into its centre. When the Turks arrived the Armenians constituted the great majority of the population in Upper Mesopotamia and the medieval Bilad al-Sham, which became the stage of this most active phase of Islamic- Armenian interactions.13 “Never before”, says C. Cahen, “the Armenians

12 Shakir, MuÒ†afa, ‘Dukhul al-Turk al-Ghuzz ila al-Sham’, in Al-Mu’tamar al-Dawli li- Tarikh Bilad al-Sham Fi’l-Jami‘a al-Urduniyya (Beirut, 1974), pp. 303-398, on p. 350. Ktrij is a purely Armenian word and means brave young man. It is the equivalent of the Arabic fata and like the latter it referred to members of the futuwwa or urban youth organizations. The Nawikis were possibly Armenian militant groups who after the arrival of Tughril Bek and his brother Alp Arslan in the region joined them like many of their colleagues and claimed to be Turkomans or Ghuzz, whom in fact they despised and fought. There is an elaborate account in Matthew’s Chronicle about this mysterious figure. See Matthew of Edessa, Jamanakagru†yun [Chronicle] (Yerevan, 1973), pp. 131-132; Sib† Ibn al-Jawzi, Mir’at al-Zaman, Paris MS # 1506. 13 They were on the eastern border regions of the Byzantine Empire, in the valleys of the Euphrates and the Orontes, the two sides of the Taurus, Melitene, Sivas, Caesarea, Tarsus, North Syria and Edessa. (See Laurent, Byzance et les Turcs Seldjoucides dans l’Asie Occidentale 182 S.B. DADOYAN played in the history of the Near East as great a role as they did at this som- brest moment in their history of national independence.”14 Four factors created the historic moment which I call the Armenian intermezzo in Bilad al-Sham from the middle of the eleventh century to the end of the next: the military prowess of the Armenian dissidents or the sects and their long alliance with the Muslims; Byzantine return to the east; the fall of the Bagratids and the outflow of Armenians to the west and south; the penetration of the Turks and the Armenian-Turkoman/Seljuk alliance (in turn an almost unstudied theme). The four instances that are discussed below are models of the manners in which some Armenians interacted with both the old and new Muslim elements. Armenian military and political power in Upper Mesopotamia and al-Sham took two basic forms: principalities which were initially established or allowed to exist by Byzantium on its eastern borders and Muslim-Armenian powers which either presented themselves as Turks or were political converts to Islam.15

The Turkoman attire: Danishmands in Cappadocia and Nawikis in al-Sham - The Danishmands were the descendents of a prominent Armenian family from Georgia known as Baghwashi-Liparitians who joined the Turks after the fall of Ani in 1045 and during early Seljuk penetration.16 Some disillu-

jusqu’en 1081 (Paris, 1914), p. 67; Alboyajian, History (see n. 1), II, p. 403. See also C. Cahen, La Syrie du Nord à l’époque des Croisades et la Principauté franque d’Antioche (Paris, 1940). Archeological data indicate the existence of many Armenian villages around Antioch and Lattakieh like Aramo, Ya’qubiyyah, Shughur, Ghenamiah, etc. (See Alboyajian, History, II, p. 402. See also A. Surmeyan, Patmu†yun Îalepi Îayots-Surya [History of the Armenians of Aleppo-Syria], I (Aleppo, 1940), p. 941. 14 Cahen, La Syrie du Nord (see n. 13), pp. 184-185. 15 At the time of the arrival of the Franks around 1097, there were four major Armenian principalities on the peripheral regions of al-Sham: the Principality of Philaretus in Mar‘ash, the Principality of Gogh Vasil in Kaysum and Raban, the Principalities of Melitene and Edessa. Between the valleys of the Euphrates and Orontes there were several other territorial lordships in Rawandan (just north of Kilis), Andriun (near Mar‘ash), ÅovÈ (southeast of Îanzit and Kharbert), Bira (or Birejik on the Euphrates south of Qal‘at al-Rum), Tall Bashir (on the river Sajur, south of Ayn†ab), Gargar (on the Euphrates, southeast of Melitene), Banu Sumbul or Sambil or Samwil (just north of Samosata). In addition, there were smaller tribal lands in the whole northern part of al-Sham. (See Alboyajian, History (see n. 1), II, pp. 13-19.) 16 See S. Yeremyan, ‘Liparit Zoravari Hajordnere yev Danishmanyan Tohmi Åagman Khendirê’ [The descendents of General Liparit and the Question of the Origin of the ARMENIANS IN CONTACT WITH ISLAM 183 sioned Armenians, like this clan, who having lost national sovereignty and land to the Greeks simply chose to join the new powers which happened to be Muslim Seljuks. Rad (or Hrahad) son of Liparit, known as ‘Turkoman’ AÌmad Daylu/Dilu/Taylu/Tilu was nicknamed ‘Danishmand’ because he was the danishmand or the tutor of the sons of Alp Arslan (‘Izz ed-din MuÌammad – 1063-1072). He knew Arabic and Persian well and was the chamberlain or Ìajib of Alp Arslan. He obtained permission from Abbasid Caliph al-Qa’im (1031-1075) to participate in the jihad against the Greeks in Asia Minor.17 In 1071 he was in PoÈr HayÈ (the area from Erzinjan to the Alice River), ‘liberated’ some territories at the centre of which was Niksar or Neo- Caesarea and became the hereditary ruler over this part of Cappadocia con- trolling Sivas, Melitene and Caesarea over a century.18 Enemies of the Franks, the Danishmands were in good terms with the Zanguis and Nur ed- din in particular; neighbourly relations were maintained with their Cilician compatriots and Great Prince Mleh, a protégé and ally of Nur ed-din.19 The case of the Muslim Armenian Danishmands seems a more common phenomenon of those times than many traditional Armenologists would care to consider. An indication to this fact is the manner in which strictly orthodox Matthew of Edessa presented him: In the year 1105 died Danish- mand, “the great Amir of Rum, who was an Armenian. He was a good man, constructive and immensely benevolent towards the Christians. The faithful [Armenians] who were his subjects mourned his death. He left twelve sons, the eldest of whom, called Ghazi, succeeded him after secretly eliminating all his brothers”.20 Danishmandid history is our lead to the most fascinating yet obscure group referred to as Nawikis or Bawikis or Yarukis or Awaqis in the histories of early Turkoman or Ghuzz penetration into al-Sham. The three prominent figures are Ibn Khan, Aqsiz or Atsiz and Amir Ketrij-Arisighi.

Danishman Family], HSSH GA Teghekagir Hasarakakan Gitu†yunneri, 8 (1947), pp. 65- 79. Also see Aristakes Lastivertsi, Patmu†yun [History] (Tbilisi, 1912), p. 123. 17 A. Alboyajian, Patmu†yun Îay Kesaryo [History of Armenian Caesarea], I (Cairo, 1937), p. 486; also see Y. Kasuni-Gommagenatsi, ∏ilardos Hayê [Philaretus the Armenian] (Aleppo, 1930). 18 Yeremyan, ‘The Descendents of Libarit’ (see n. 16), p. 68. 19 Ibn al-’Adim, Zubdat al-Îalab (see n. 6), II, pp. 337-338. 20 Matthew, Chronicle (see n. 12), pp. 197-198. 184 S.B. DADOYAN

The Nawikis were active on the stage of al-Sham at least for two decades until the fall of the South Syrian Principality of Aqsiz in Palestine in 1078. The ethnic background of the Nawikis has not been studied yet. “They were a special sort of people [sha‘ab] of Turks”, says S. MuÒ†afa, “and called themselves Nawikiyyah.” However, he remarks, “the name does not appear in al-Kashgari’s Diwan of the Turkish languages of that particular period, it does not exist in the names of the Ghuzz tribes either. It is sometimes written as al-Yawikiyya. The Nawikis were in bad terms with the Seljuks and stood apart from [tafarrud] the other Ghuzz-Seljuk tribes.”21 Similar to the Liparitian-Danishmands, the Nawikis were very possibly of Georgian descent judging from the names of their leaders, like Shakli, Mankli, Jawli, the brothers of their leader Atsiz or Aqsiz ibn Awaq or Avak (Aqsiz means not-generous, while Atsiz means or horseless or nameless; Awaq or Avac is a typically Armenian first name). During Alp Arslan’s and Tughril Bek’s invasions they presented themselves as Turkomans, when their leader, Amir Ktrij disappeared in Constantinople, they fell in a state of con- fusion because they feared the Greeks and had failed to gain the confidence of the Turks.22 According to Ibn al-Jawzi, in the year 462/1069, and perhaps earlier on, “Badr al-Jamali, the Fatimid Wali of al-Sham, sent messages to some Turko- man factions established in al-Rum and asked them to assist him in driving the Bedouin Arabs from the urban areas and cities.”23 The Fatimids were never really welcome in Syria and it was not easy for Badr whose power-base was always Armenian, to find allies there; he could not hope for any assistance from Cairo too. The enmity between the Nawikis and the Seljuks was another factor which contributed to Badr’s choice of these dangerous militant factions. Some of the Nawikis remained loyal to him to the end and in 1073, when al-Mus†anÒir summoned him, he could respond immediately and bring together thousands of armed Muslim- Armenian troops and sail to Egypt in the winter of 1074. Eventually, between the ‘orthodox’ Abbasid East and the ‘dissident’ Fatimid West, the Nawikis sought to bring about and did indeed briefly

21 Shakir, MuÒ†afa, ‘Dukhul’ (see n. 12), pp. 349. 22 Sib† Ibn al-Jawzi, Mir’at al-Zaman (see n. 12), fol. 154 b. 23 Sib† Ibn al-Jawzi, Mir’at, fols. 134 a and b. Also see Shakir, MuÒ†afa, ‘Dukhul’ (see n. 12), p. 394, n. 152. ARMENIANS IN CONTACT WITH ISLAM 185 succeed to establish a principality as part of the Seljuk Empire, loyal to the Abbasids. When in 1072 Aqsiz entered Jerusalem he wrote to the Seljuk Sultan that he had liberated the Holy City and expressed his commitment to restore Abbasid rule there. In 1076, he entered Damascus and controlled the land from ÎimÒ to Palestine while the Fatimids were on the coast.24 In 1078 the South Syrian state of Nawikis fell at the hands of Tutush, Melik- shah’s brother.25 The Nawikis must have survived and been active to the next century: they are mentioned as the ‘nephews’ of Prince Mleh and assist him. The possible Armenian connections can be proposed here. Since there is no such tribe among the Ghuzz tribes, a weak argument could be con- structed on the possibility of that the word Nawiki, also spelled as Bawiki, Yaruki, Yawiqi, is a distorted transliteration of Pavghikian (Paulician) Bawiki, or Yawiqi from Awaqi (from Ibn Awaq).

Political converts: Banu Boghousag in Siberek and Philaretus in Mar'ash - Similar to the Danishmands and Nawikis, other Armenian clans and individuals simply made political conversions to Islam at the Seljuk court, but unlike them they publicly maintained their ethnicity, without taking over a Turkoman attire. The Muslim Armenian Bene or Banu Boghousags were political converts and masters of the mainly Armenian city of Siberek (or Sevaverak meaning ‘black ruins’): “In the fortress of Sibaberek”, says Michael the Syrian, “reigned some Armenians whose father, Boghousag, went to Baghdad then Khorasan at the start of the Turkish invasion and converted to Islam. He obtained a decree from the grand sultan of the Turks and the [Abbasid] caliph, [upon which] the place became his and an inher- itance to his descendents. This is the reason why they were Muslims.”26 The Banu Boghousags managed to gain the confidence and protection of both the Turks and the Ayyubis and survived the Frankish onslaught. They were as violent as the rest of the Armenian territorial lords in Upper Mesopotamia but their Armenian subjects had no complaints and seemed to have accepted the complex identity of this and other Muslim-Armenians as phenomena of the period.

24 Ibid., p. 370. 25 Ibid., pp. 381-382. 26 Michael the Syrian, Chronicle (see n. 4), III, pp. 247-248. 186 S.B. DADOYAN

The other major figure was Philaretus the Armenian, who appeared on the stage of al-Sham during the terms of Alp Arslan and Romanus Diogenes (1068-1071) in whose army he served. He was from the family of Vrakhamios or Varajnuni which was involved in the ‘exclusively Armenian’ revolt of Bardas Skleros in 976, then allied with the ‘brigands’ and ‘bandits’ like the Bene Bazrik, in the region of Melitene.27 Philaretus or Philardus is the best known and most frequently referred to figure in Arab sources, he is however presented in unfavourable light in the Armenian and Syriac sources. Michael the Syrian’s version of the appearance of Philaretus is as follows: “Taking advantage of the presence of the Seljuks, he says, around fifty ‘Armenian brigands’ met a young man called ‘Philardus’ from the village of Shirbaz, around Mar‘ash and made him their chief for his tough and robust character … they appropriated a fortress in Cilicia and a great number of Armenians joined and more fortresses were occupied. When the news reached the Greeks, Romanus invited Philardus, offered him a golden armour and proclaimed him augustus. He then took ™arsus, Mopsuesta, Mar‘ash, Kaysum, Ra’ban, Edessa, Anazarva, Antioch, then penetrated into the valley of Jihun and moved to Melitene. When he felt that he could not resist the Turks, he went to Baghdad and Khorasan, converted to Islam but before his return, the Turks had occupied Anti- och and the whole area. Philardus withdrew to Mar‘ash, where he died. They say that before his death he converted back to Christianity.”28 This principality around Mar‘ash in Germanica was the most complex and politically sophisticated phenomenon on the regional level. Its location and timing made it into the nucleus of the future Cilician kingdom or the ‘Small Armenia of Levon’, as the Arabs called it. This was the role and significance of Philaretus the ‘renegade’ and his colleagues of doubtful back- grounds. His Armenian ethnicity was both public and politically essential, because his power-base was formed by the Armenian ‘bandits’ in the region. And although his faith was undefinable, it was politically flexible and prag- matically workable. He acted as part of the Islamic world and was part of it

27 N. Adontz, Etudes Armeno Byzantines (Lisbon, 1965), pp. 149-150. His allies were Michael al-Burgi and Isma‘il b. Bahram. 28 Michael the Syrian, Chronicle (see n. 4), III, p. 173. ARMENIANS IN CONTACT WITH ISLAM 187 as much as the Arab, Kurdish and the Turkish Amirs were at the time. His ceremonial conversion to Islam in 1084 was an attempt to legalize his status within the Seljuk Empire, like themselves the Seljuks and his compatriots the Danishmands and the Boghousags had done at different times, but the Turks could not allow a political power of the dimensions of the state of Philaretus to flourish. However, this principality continued in lesser size to the second decade of the next century around Kaysum through the Princi- pality of Gogh Vasil. The latter was in turn a ‘bandit’ or ‘brigand’ from the Bene Bazriks/Vazrik/Ghazarik; many details in the history of this clan give reason to us to believe that his father Ghazar was most probably the ‘red- haired-dog Ghazar’ the Tonrakian, that Grigor Magistros persecuted and drove to AsoriÈ or what we mean by Northern Sham.

The Fatimid Armenians: ‘Aziz al-dawla of Aleppo to Jamalis and Ruzziks The involvement of the militant Muslim Armenians in the politics of Upper Mesopotamia, Syria then Egypt initiated a century of Fatimid Armenian history in the Islamic world. The Principality of ‘Aziz al-Dawla in Aleppo was the earliest symptom of this developed phase in Islamic-Armenian interactions. The first Fatimid Muslim Armenian, ‘discovered’ in my Fatimid Armenians was Amir ‘Aziz al-Dawla, one of the most important Fatimid governors of Aleppo in the administration of the Caliph al-Îakim. A favorite ghulam of Mangutakin, the Fatimid governor of Damascus, he was appointed wali of Aleppo in 1016. Half a century before Philaretus, the Principality of ‘Aziz al-Dawla flourished and survived to the year 1022 between two of the most powerful and dangerous figures of his time: Basil II and al-Îakim. This peculiar character was a lover of poetry and celebrated Christmas in the fortress of Aleppo.29

29 The great skeptic poet and thinker Abu’l-‘Ala’ al-Ma‘arri dedicated to him two allegor- ical poems: Risalat al-∑ahil wa'l-ShaÌijs and Kitab al-Qa'if. In the year 1022 ‘Aziz al Dawla was the victim of an assassination plot by one of his ghulams, the Armenian Abu Najm or Abu’l-Najm Badr (possibly at the instigation of al-Îakim's sister Sitt al-Mulk). This youth was rewarded by the Fatimid court and took over his master's position for brief while. A number of facts suggest that this Armenian youth was indeed the Fatimid vizier Abu’l-Najm Badr al-Jamali, who is first mentioned as a military man in the service of Jamal Abu Îammar, the master of Tripoli. See Dadoyan, The Fatimid Armenians (see n. 5), pp. 106-112. The book was: Abu’l-‘Ala’ al-Ma‘arri, Risalat al-∑ahil wa'l-ShaÌij, ed., introd. and notes ‘A’isha ‘Abd al-RaÌman (Cairo, 19842). 188 S.B. DADOYAN

This militant Muslim Armenian, could not have been and was not an iso- lated case: during his term there were Armenian militants in Aleppo itself and Syria in general. In the context of his accounts of that period, al- Maqrizi tells that in the year 1030 there were great numbers of Armenian armed groups in Aleppo and that they took part in the battles against the Byzantine armies.30 We know that as of the first years of the tenth century, the Greeks transplanted Armenian military colonies and communities in North Syria, along the Euphrates and the Orontes. The deported Armenians obviously were not passive communities nor remained politically neutral, and anyway, on the popular level there was always resentment against the Greeks. In the new locations, some factions of sectarian background seem to have presented themselves as sun-worshippers or Shamsiyya al-Arman, probably to conceal their identity. We have a very brief report by Matthew of Edessa, according to which during the early 1120’s there were Armenian arevapasht’s (or sun-worshippers) in the fortress of Menbij at the time when Ortuqid Ballak invaded it. He was indeed slain by the arrow of an arevapasht from the fortress.31 Matthew also describes these sun-worshippers as Muslims or tajiks. One of the theses of my broader research is that the Muslim Armenians were basically the sectarians of the earlier centuries known for their sun-worship; indeed, there are traces of sun-worship in the Epic of Digenes Akrites too. Armenian sun-worshippers appear again in the episode of the murder of Amir Bazwag in the citadel of Damascus, because the latter was in strained relations with Shihab ed-din b. Buri.32 Before proceeding, an extremely essential point must be brought to our attention: within the decade from 1070 to 1080, five Muslim Armenian powers flourished in Upper Mesopotamia, al-Sham and Egypt. They were the Danishmands in Cappadocia, the Palestinian state of Aqsiz, the state of Philaretus in Mar‘ash, the Banu Boghoussags in Siberek and Badr al-Jamali’s

30 Al-Maqrizi, Itti'aÂ al-Hunafa‘ bi Akhbar al-A'imma al-Fa†imiyyin al-Khulafa', ed. M.H.M. AÌmad (Cairo, 1971), II, p. 179. 31 Matthew of Edessa, Chronicle (see n. 12), p. 240. 32 The latter plotted against him and killed him in the citadel of Damascus. According to Ibn al-Qalanisi, “on Monday the 6th of Sha’aban [18 April, 1138] Shihab ed-din detailed a party of the Armenian shamsiyya, who were members of his cortege” killed Bazwag, See Ibn al-Qalanisi, Chronicle or Dhayl Tarikh Dimashq (Beirut, 1908), p. 247. ARMENIANS IN CONTACT WITH ISLAM 189 vizieral rule in Egypt. Their number, the period in which they started their careers and the success they achieved in the Islamic world make the period a singular moment that deserves thorough study.

Fatimid Armenians and vizieral dynasties in Egypt (1074-1163) – The rise of Badr to highest position in the Fatimid hierarchy and six Muslim Armenian viziers, ruling a total of 60 years, constituted the highlights of what is known as the ‘Armenian period’ in Fatimid Egypt (1074-1063). The first three Jamali's, Badr, his son al-Af∂al Shahanshah and Kutayfat b. al-Af∂al, formed a miniature dynasty. Another son of al-Af∂al, Sharaf al-Ma‘ali b. al- Af∂al is said to have succeeded him immediately but was soon liquidated by his cousin Caliph al-Amir, the son of al-Musta’li (a grandson of Badr al- Jamali). The hayba (awe inspiring image) of Badr was very briefly renewed in a mamluk of al-Af∂al, Yanis al-Rumi al-Armani; he led the plot to assas- sinate Kutayfat and was granted vizierhood of Caliph al-ÎafiÂ for a very short term of nine months in 1131. Less than fifteen years after the death of vizier Bahram al-Armani, in 1154, the Banu Ruzzik, i.e., ™ala’i‘, his son Ruzzik and other members of their clan took over for seven years from 1154 to the end of 1162. Had everything gone according to plan and circumstances permitted, a grandson of ™ala’i‘ (son of his daughter married to the Caliph al-‘A∂i∂) would have reached the caliphate, similar to Badr's grandson al-Musta’li. Only one of the seven Armenian viziers, Bahram was Chris- tian and he was a grandson of Grigor Magistros Pahlavuni. His short term in office (1135-1137) marked an ‘orthodox interval’ between the Jamali House of viziers and the Banu Ruzzik. The aftermath of this period saw the most violent reaction to his excessively pro-Christian policy and anti-Mus- lim operations. With the exception of Badr and Bahram, all the Jamalis and the Banu Ruzziks did not die of natural deaths. Badr's arrival delayed the fall of the caliphate by a century and kept the Seljuk Turks permanently out of Egypt. His powerful position as vizier of the Sword and the Pen with delegated (tafwi∂) and executive (tanfidh) powers, became a precedent and was maintained to the end of the caliphate. He died in 1094 in his eighties and his son, al-Af∂al Shahanshah succeeded him. For almost half a century, these two Armenians were the virtual rulers of Egypt which at their hands regained much of its previous prosperity and peace. 190 S.B. DADOYAN

Although himself said to be a devout Shi‘i, Amir al-Juyush Badr al-Jamali had a full grasp of the strange position of a dissident or rafi∂ dynasty like the Isma‘ili Fatimids in predominantly Sunni and some Christian Egypt. When he managed to be appointed vizier of the Sword and the Pen, he practically confiscated the political and military powers of the already weakened Fatimid Imam, Caliph al-MustanÒir and allowed him to play the religious part of his exceptionally superior office. No objection could be expected from the Sunni populace and, since the Fatimid Isma‘ili da‘wa or mission reached its peak during this term, the Fatimids whom Badr almost raised of their ashes could not complain either. The walls of Cairo were expanded and rebuilt, the gates erected (by three Armenian architects from Edessa), new mosques built and commerce activated. In addition, within the Islamic world Badr’s shrewd play on sectarian differences offended no one’s religious feelings and his Armenian identity aroused no discontentment. It was at the hands of al-Af∂al that Fatimid Isma‘ilism suffered a heavy blow when he prevented Nizar from rising to the throne of his father and instead appointed his nephew al-Musta‘li, a half-Armenian; he simply over- threw the concept of the Fatimid imamate. He was said to have Sunni sympathies, obviously to gain the support of the Sunni Egyptians. At any rate, al-Af∂al secularized his office and the administration and was still a highly praised figure in the Islamic world, except for the Fatimid radicals at whose hands he was assassinated at the instigation of Caliph al-Amir, his sister’s grandson. The Twelver Shi’ism of Kutayfat b. al-Af∂al was instrumental in his plan to eradicate the imamate altogether. By proclaiming allegiance to the Expected Imam, he dismissed the legitimacy of the Fatimid Imams hence the caliphate altogether. Again, the Sunni Egyptians were not particularly saddened at this manipulation of the political culture of Islam and Kutayfat was still praised for his benevolence and justice. Throughout the 50 year term of the Jamalis, and despite their obvious underestimation of the Fatimid Imam, all three were highly respected figures and the hundred thousand Armenians (according to almost all sources) who immigrated there prospered. There is only one brief episode of anti-Armenian atrocities as a consequence of anti-Muslim policies of the only Christian vizier, Bahram al-Armani, the vizier of Caliph al-Îafiz, a grandson of Grigor Magistros Pahlavuni. To the year 1154 no Armenian ARMENIANS IN CONTACT WITH ISLAM 191 rose to this position but we find hundreds of Muslim Armenians in the army and the administration, in addition to their personal and the mainly Armenian Juyushiyya troops. The bloody events surrounding the murder of the Caliph al-Åafir and pleas by the royal household, brought the Muslim Armenian governor of Ushmunayn ™ala’i' b. Ruzzik al-Armani to Cairo at the head of a private force of mainly Armenians. He restored order and was proclaimed vizier to five year old Caliph al-Fa‘iz. Taken in isolation and out of context, the terms of ™ala'i' and his son and successor Ruzzik are not out of the ordinary, but two factors grant the subject exceptional relevance to our theme. The first is the return of the Armenian element, after and despite the negative effects of Bahram's demise. It seems that the factors which contributed to the most peaceful period of Muslim-Armenian co-existence were still active and allowed the arrival of another Armenian to a position of almost absolute power. The other reason why the case of ™ala'i' and the Ruzziks is of significance, is that this Armenian NuÒayris clan came from the city of Vostan also known as Bustan (as I discovered recently) south east of Lake Van. They were contemporaries of the Banu Boghousags and probably many others in the same region. But it is the first time we encounter sub-Shi'i Armenians directly. They moved south, stayed in Syria for a while, probably in a NuÒayri area in the northwest, fought the Crusaders and then ended up in Egypt.33 The NuÒayri Ruzziks had no respect for the super-human status of the caliph or the Imam and as their predecessors, they manipulated the system for almost nine years (1154-1163). But as a devout, fanatical and militant Imami, ™ala’i‘ constantly appealed to Zangui Nureddin for Muslim unity and invited him to holy war or jihad to expel the Franks or the infidels from the Islamic world. Most of his poems are dedicated to the Prophet ‘Ali and the cause of Shi‘i Islam, and similar to al-Af∂al, he too has love poems addressed to his ghulams. ™ala’i‘ is the most devout Muslim Armenian for whom Islam was primarily a doctrine. There is no doubt in my mind that he understood and lived Islam as a political culture too and could not understand the pragmatism of the Zanguis in dealing with the Franks. But

33 Ibn al-Qalanisi, The Damascus Chronicle of the Crusaders, extract, trans. from The Chronicle of Ibn al-Qalanisi, H.A.R. Gibb (London, 1932), p. 130. 192 S.B. DADOYAN despite his complete ‘Islam’, like the others he was regularly referred to as an ‘Armenian NuÒayri’ with no further remark on the odd combination. The manner in which the Jamalis, the Ruzzis and others are presented in Islamic histories and their contemporaries makes it very easy to imagine more Muslim Armenian NuÒayri or other clans in the region. On the popular level, the transition from ™onrakism to NuÒayrism and sub-Shi‘i Islam was not difficult. Just as NuÒayrism was a version of syncretistic and popularized Isma‘ilism, popular ™onrakism too was a vulgarized synthesis of early Christianity, Zoroastrianism with strong Messianic traces of Shi‘i Islam. Dissident and militant factions at base level could easily and indeed did make transitions which are too broad to be described as ‘religious conversions’. Islam in this context was even more interactive than on the level of the orthodox establishment, where conversions were purely political. After the assassination of the last Muslim Armenian vizier, Ruzzik b. ™ala’i‘ in 1163, some of the Ruzzik clan fled back to central Syria and set- tled near Salamieh, a Nizari Isma‘ili stronghold. The historic link between Islamic sects and the Armenian sects finds some basis in this episode. On the popular level, peaceful coexistence marked over hundred years of life in Egypt. After the fall of the Fatimids in 1171, Ayyubi ∑alaÌ ed-din’s persecutions of Armenians in particular drove them to the north and mainly to Cilicia which by that time had become an Armenian homeland.

Interaction through urban evolution: Armenization of Abbasid Caliph al-NaÒir’s futuwwa project in Erzinjan As of the eleventh century, urban development created the environment and contexts for closer contacts, such as the youth organizations or the futuwwas. In a paper on the subject I have proposed the thesis that the histories of medieval Armenian and Islamic youth brotherhoods constitute a single theme in Near Eastern urbanism, because as primarily urban coali- tions they were inevitably politicized and their career and culture were extra- religious, extra-establishment and extra-national.34

34 S.B. Dadoyan, ‘The Armenian Brotherhoods and the Futuwwa and Akhi Organiza- tions in the Medieval Islamic World: The Armenization of Caliph al-Nasir’s Futuwwa Reform Project and Literature’, paper read at the Workshop on ‘Christian and Jewish Contributions to Muslim Arab Civilization’, Royal Institute for Inter-Faith Studies, Amman, Aug. 1997. ARMENIANS IN CONTACT WITH ISLAM 193

To organize and control these often anarchistic youth, religious ethics was implemented in Baghdad, then in Erzinjan. The first and only major reform project for the futuwwa was initiated by Abbasid Caliph al-NaÒir (575- 622/1180-1225). During the second decade of the century, emissaries of the Caliph travelled to Asia Minor, spread the literature and performed initiation rites in the courts of the Seljuk leaders and among the akhis of Rum Seljuk. There were youth brotherhoods in most cities of Armenia and Erzinjan, where in 1280 a Constitution appeared in two parts written by Hovhannes Yerzenkatsi (d. 1293) at the instruction of the Armenian Church which was also the political establishment in the province at the time.35 The text was an Armenization of the NaÒiri futuwwa reform project, as I have proposed in the above mentioned paper. In addition to great similarities of content and structure, three points establish the direct link between this only Armenian constitution for brotherhoods and its Islamic prototype: the absence of any precedent in Armenian medieval literature, striking similarities to the NaÒiri reformist literature for the Youth or Futuwwa organizations of Baghdad and the availability of futuwwa texts in Erzinjan.36 Following Mongol invasions, the Constitution of Erzinjan was taken to the Crimean, West Ukrainian, Polish and Rumanian urban centres of the Armenian Diaspora. It became a model and was applied to the nineteenth century.

CULTURAL-DOCTRINAL ISLAM AND THE ARMENIANS

Islamic sciences Interaction on the level of natural sciences, philosophy, language, literature, arts and architecture seem to have been active only after the end of Arab

35 H. Yerzenkatsi, ‘Definition and Canons of the Association of Brothers, United by Divine Love into the Brotherhood at the Metropolis Called Yezênka in the year 1280’, in E. Paghtasarian, ‘Hovhannes Yerzenkatsi: Khratakan Arzakê’ [The Didactic Prose] (Yerevan, 1977), pp. 220-228, on 227. The question of medieval Armenian brotherhoods was first raised by Levon Khachikian in two articles: ‘1280 Tvakanin Yerzenkayum Kazmakerpvaz Yeghbayrutyune’ [The Brotherhood of Erzenka Organized in 1280], Teghekagir [Newsletter of the Academy of Sciences of the ASSR], 12 (1951), pp. 73-84; and ‘Yerzenka Kaghaki Yeghbarts Miyutyan Kanonadrutyune – 1280’ [The Constitution of the Brotherhood of the City of Erzenka-1280], Banber Matenadarani, 6 (1962), pp. 365-377. 194 S.B. DADOYAN rule and as of the Bagratid period in the last quarter of the ninth century. Similarities traced in philosophies are due to a common source in Greek culture and in particular the Platonic-Aristotelian tradition often transmitted through Neoplatonic channels after the seventh century (in Armenia) and eventually to Islamic thinkers. As of the tenth century and during the twelfth to the fourteenth centuries, the opening up of the region to all sorts of elements from the east to the west, broadened and sometimes obliterated the definitions of ‘orthodoxy’. Armenians lived on a very broad area within the Islamic world of the Arabs, Turks, Mongols, Kurds, both orthodox and dissident. Direct influences of Arab sciences and culture were activated in these circumstances and mainly in Cilicia and the southern parts of Upper Mesopotamia and Armenia. In general, there are no out-of-the ordinary interactions with cultural and doctrinal Islam, at least on the level of available literature. There is also no direct reference to ‘Islamic’ philosophers and scientists or any one in particular, except one. This is a small treatise by Hovhannes Yerzenkatsi entitled ‘Views from the Writings of Islamic Philosophers’ (I Tajkats Imastasirats Grots Ëaghyal BanÈ). This was a very concise summary of some basic tenets expounded in the tenth-century esoteric ‘Epistles of the Brethren of Purity’ (Rasa'il Ikhwan al-Safa), as I discovered many years ago. The large number of transliterated Arabic and Persian terms, the primitive composition of the text and the elementary presentation of philosophical concepts justified the conclusion that it was compiled during his studies as a priest mid-1260’s. In his earliest known treatises written in 1272 and more clearly later, the influ- ence of the Epistles is explicit.37 Hovhannes also wrote two cosmological treatises around 1280 which in turn were direct reflections of the eclectic and esoteric cosmology of the Brethren of Purity. In his Constitution too, as in his cosmological treatise, Hovhannes advises the ‘brothers’ to consider and appreciate the ideas of the wise men of all nations. When his books were adopted as textbooks and references, these liberal dispositions were

36 I have found a Persian text in the collection of Futuwwa texts, Aya Sofia MS #2049, fols. 241-246, by AÌmad b. Îammad MuÌammad al-™uÒi, a son of NaÒir ed-din al-™uÒi, for the sama‘ of the Brothers of Erzinjan. 37 See S.B. Dadoyan, John of Erzenka: ‘Views from the Writings of Islamic Philosophers’ and Philosophical Treatises in the Light of their Islamic Sources (Beirut, 1991). ARMENIANS IN CONTACT WITH ISLAM 195 transmitted to the Armenian universities of Glazor and Ta†ev on the main- land.38

Literature - poetry: Narekatsi, Magistros and Constantin Arabic poetry has served as a model for not just Armenian but world literature too. From academic figures like medieval mystic and monastic Grigor Narekatsi (d. 1003) to a military man and aristocrat Grigor Pahlavuni Magistros (d. 1058), we find strong influences of this art. On the popular level, the urban culture of the youth brotherhoods as early as the tenth century was the channel for massive interaction. As closely knit groups in the medieval cities of the Near East, they became the vehicles for the shaping and development of popular urban cultures. A good part of their folklore consisted of chronicles, dances, military sports, but mainly songs and lyrical poetry. The daily parties of the fityan/manuks were perhaps the most important elements in their culture, for it was during these gath- erings that poets recited their verses, musicians played and at least some of the dancing girls sang and played instruments. The parties of the urban brothers were the context of the lyrical poetry of Hovhannes (d. 1293) and especially Constantin Yerzenkatsi (must have died in the 1330’s), both members of the Brotherhood of Erzinjan. If for reasons of being a man of the Church the former was more reserved and systematically didactic, the latter was completely free in his creative work. Furthermore, he sang for the pleasure of an audience of different nationalities that is familiar to other poets and a long tradition of poetry that we have in al-Isfahani’s Kitab al- Aghani. At the end of the fourteenth century, Mat†eos Jughayetsi describes similar urban male parties of songs and wine.39

38 Very much aware of the significance of his initiative to borrow knowledge from Islamic sources, Hovhannes introduces his cosmological doctrines entitled ‘On the Heavenly Ornaments’ by advising the seeker of knowledge not to shun the sciences of the “foreign races”. “He who pursues knowledge”, he remarks, “should not concern himself with its racial origins.” (Ibid., p. 156). Hovhannes Yerzenkatsi, ‘Haghags Yerknayin Sharjmann’ [On the Heavenly Ornaments], Matenadaran MS #4207, ff. 363b, in The Writings in Verse, ed. and notes A. Srabian (Yerevan, Sovetakan Grogh, 1986). The same in the prose version: ‘Haghags Yerknayin Zarduts’ [Concerning the Heavenly Motions], Matenadaran MS #2173, ff. 151a. Both works were first published as Tetrak Hamarot yev Li Imast- nakhoh BanivÈ [Concise Book Full of Wise Words] (Nor Nakhijevan, 1792). 39 S. B. Dadoyan, ‘A Case Study for Redefining Armenian-Christian Cultural Identity in the Framework of Near Eastern Urbanism, 13th Century – The NaÒiri Futuwwa Literature 196 S.B. DADOYAN

Islam and Armenian Polemical strategies at the end of an era After over seven and a half centuries of history with Islam, within five years (1392-1397) there appeared three texts about Islam in a region of less than 400 kilometres in diameter, between Akh†amar southeast of Lake Van and Ta†ev in SiuniÈ. For the first time in Armenian medieval literature they crys- tallized the official attitude of the Church towards Islam. The author of the first two texts written in 1392 is Mat†eos Jughayetsi, they are: Various Responses to the Questions of the Infidels40 and a sermon known as There Arose False Prophets.41 Against the Muslims is our third text and is a chapter in the Book of Questions (1397) by the great teacher of Mat†eos, Grigor Ta†evatsi.42 Both authors belonged to the intellectual tradition of Ta†ev and were active defenders of the Armenian Apostolic faith against the Latinophile Unitari- ans, the religious sects (ÌerzvaÂoghÈ) and the Tajiks or the Muslims. Although the period is marked for oppressions, high taxes on Christians and conversions, when we read these theological texts carefully, we realize that it was cultural Islam which concerned these authors and an uninhibited interaction with the Islamic milieu and assimilation of the folklore was the cause of the urgency. The target of a good deal of Grigor’s attacks are on the ‘primitive’ beliefs and practices of the Muslims. There is a well designed strategy to undermine not only their cultural criteria but their religious ethics in particular, like the corporeality of the rewards of paradise, using a not-too-bright image of the Prophet MuÌammad.

and the Brotherhood Poetry of Hovhannes and Costantin of Yerzênka: Texts and Contexts’, paper read at the Conference on ‘Redefining Christian Identity, Christian Cultural Strategies since the Rise of Islam’, Groningen, April 1999. 40 Mat†eos Vardapeti vasn hartsmants anorinats zanazan pataskhanin zor khêndryal barepashtên Abisoghom meÂ tanyterên Shiryana [Various Responses to the Questions of the Infidels by Mat†eos Vardapet Requested by the Great Elder (tanuter) of Shiryan Pious Abisoghom] (Matenadaran, MS #3854, EjmiaÂin MS #956). For his biography see L. Khachikian, ‘Life and Works of Matteos Jughayetsi’, Banber Matenadarani, 3 (1956), pp, 57-84, 58-59. 41 In Haritsen sut MargareÈ, in Ëarozner, no. 23 in a collection of 44 Sermons, although he is said to have 50. (Matenadaran, MS #579, 2229; EjmiaÂin MS # 710, 2114). 42 Against the Muslims is in Babgen Kuleserian, Islamê hay matenagru†yan mej – Grigor Ta †evatsvo ‘Enddem Tajkats’: I Ëashunen ËaghaÂu [Islam in Armenian Literature – Against the Tajiks of Grigor Ta†evatsi: Excerpts from the Ëashun] (Vienna, 1930). In GirÈÎarts- mants Yeritsês Yeranyal Sêrbo Horên Mero Grigori Ta†evatsuyn [Book of Questions] (Con- stantinople, 1729). ARMENIANS IN CONTACT WITH ISLAM 197

Despite obvious political conflict and resentment between the Mongols and Armenians, interactions and conversions were part of the historic process and it seems that the sects and the urban youth brotherhoods were channels and instruments of interaction. The career of the Muslim Armenians in Upper Mesopotamia, al-Sham and Egypt earlier on stood as a testimony to the attraction of cultural and political Islam. Mat†eos complained that Islamic names and customs were already adopted. The Armenian Church could not treat Islam as a heresy anymore but a real threat that finally declared its position and strategy. One of the few means available was the art of debate which these texts sought to teach. As in the fifth century, when Eznik’s Refutation of the Sects outlined the position of Christianity towards the religions and cultures in the region, in turn the polemical literature of Mat†eos and Grigor concluded an era of medieval heresies and drew lines of national religious orthodoxy in the face of Islam and in competition with it.

Architecture: Islamic forms in Armenia, Armenian Forms in Fatimid Egypt Historians of medieval Armenian architecture follow a very broad classification: Early Classical, which extends from the adoption of Christianity as state religion in 301 to Arab rule in the seventh century. The two centuries from the rise of Bagratid power around 862 to the fall of Ani to the Seljuks in 1063, constitute the ‘First Renaissance’. After a gap of equal length, begins a period of sharp rise in great architectural works during the rule of the Zakarians – the successors of the Bagratids as they claimed – from early thirteenth century to the arrival of the Mongols during the early 1380’s. The Cilician dynasty coincides with this period. A revival needed over two centuries to come about in the seventeenth century but in a less concentrated fashion, geographically at least. By the end of the seventh century and the consolidation of Arab rule, religious architecture and engineering had already reached a level to be considered ‘classic’. Almost all future elaboration was a development of this early medieval period. The First Renaissance was part of Bagratid rise to a national dynasty and indeed lasted as long as they did. It is at this period that Islamic influences were welcome, it seems. On the popular level of crafts, everyday life, costume and practices contacts were natural. The high relief on the east facade of the Church of the Holy Seal at Haghbat (Tashir) built during the second half of 198 S.B. DADOYAN the tenth century depicted Princes Smbat and Gurgen, sons of Bagratid King Ashot III presenting the church to God, clad in full Islamic costume and head- dress. We see a similar costume in the statue of King Gagik in the church of King Gagik known as St. Gregory of Abughamr family in Ani.43 Otherwise the church shows no trace of Islamic influences, nor do the churches of the late tenth century as structures; there are minor ornamental details, but these are usually the contribution of the masons. As we move into the eleventh century, Islamic influences become more conspicuous. In the study of interactions two factors should be considered: Islamic iconoclasm and the introduction of geometric forms in Armenian architecture and arts; and urban exigencies. Mutual sympathy towards the exoticism of the other’s folklore and ways flourish even in hostile milieus. We find ample evidence to this effect in the design of inns where travellers rested, ornamentation on all levels of everyday life as well as manuscript illuminations. The low-reliefs on the external walls of the Church of the Holy Cross at Agh†amar (Vaspurakan) built by Gagik ArÂruni in 915-921 are irre- placeable documents of already eclectic culture.44 One of the earliest examples of ornamental influences on church architecture is the Church of St. Gregory at Sanahin built in 1061, where the pointed arch and the geometric capitals of engaged columns are intro- duced.45 Otherwise the reliefs as well as the frescos are heavily figurative. However, Islamic iconoclasm accompanied by its corollary geometric elaboration did act as factors in opening new channels of creativity for the artists and craftsmen. The wooden doors of the church at the convent of the Holy Apostles in Mush (Taron) built in 1134 can hang on any Islamic structure, but the heavy frame depicts wild beasts, or evil, devils and sins being hunted.46 The Islamic pointed arches on the tympanums of thirteenth-century churches is not uncommon. The Chapel of the Holy Illuminator at Gosha- vanÈ (Artsakh) built in 1237; the Jamatun at Ha®ijavanÈ (Ayrarat) built in 1225 are only few. The reliefs of the main church of MakaravanÈ (Artsakh) built around 1205, and NorvaragavanÈ in same area built in 1225-1237 are

43 J.-M. Thierry, Armenian Art (New York, 1989), pp. 142-143; also pp. 482-483. 44 Ibid., pp. 378-382. 45 Ibid., p. 157. 46 Ibid., p. 388. ARMENIANS IN CONTACT WITH ISLAM 199 typically Islamic.47 Pointed arches are abundantly used in fourteenth- century illuminations too, again in an eclectic fashion mixed with figurative styles.48 One of the most interesting structures left of Ani, the capital of the Bagratids as of 961, is an inn called ‘The Baron’s Palace’ built in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth century. Nowhere else we find richer eclec- tism typical of the late Seljukid period than in this relic.49 Of the same period but a little later we find conspicuously Islamic design of the church mausoleum at Yeghvard.50 Some Khachkars (memorial slabs with a cross at centre) at GoshavanÈ of the early 1300’s, are in turn in pure Iranian-Islamic art with the exception of the cross.51 A simpler form a niche with a triple pointed arch is found on northwest corner of the Bell Tower of the church of the Holy Seal at Haghbat (tenth century), but the complex is otherwise classic.52 It was in the seventeenth century that churches like the Holy Sav- ior of New Julfa completely adopted the Islamic forms.53

47 Ibid., p. 400. 48 Ibid., p. 436. 49 Ibid., p. 489. 50 Ibid., p. 521. 51 Ibid., p. 531. 52 Ibid., p. 535. 53 Ibid., p. 561.