INTRODUCTION THE AUTHOR Michael the Great was born in Melitene in the year 1126 within a Syriac1 Orthodox priestly family, for his father was a priest, his uncle Athanasius Zachai was a bishop, and some of his brothers and nephews rose to bishopric ranks. He became a monk at the distinguished Monastery of Mōr-Barṣawmō,2 located in the region of Melitene, the mention of which occurs almost in every folio of his Chronicle that has been edited and translated in the present book. The monastery was the patriarchal seat between the 11th and the 13th centuries, before its transfer to another prestigious monastery, that of Mōr-Ḥananiō. This monastery, commonly known as Dayr al-Zaʿfarān (Saffron), is located near the city of Mārdīn in eastern Turkey and was the patriarchal seat from 1293 to First War I.3 Michael became the abbot of the Monastery of Mōr-Barṣawmō4 for ten years and in 1166 he was elected patriarch in a most instable period, politically, militarily and ecclesiastically. Politically, there were countless ruling entities that fought against each other to impose their hegemonies over lands in Anatolia, including Crusaders (always called frangōyē “Franks”),5 Turks, Arabs (always called Ṭāyyōyē), and 1 In this book, the term Syriac refers to the Orthodox Church, literature and authors, while the term Syrian refers to the Orthodox Christians in general. 2 Mōr-Barṣawmō was a monk and abbot during the turbulent years of the Christological disputes (essentially mid-5th century). His popularity among the Syrian Orthodox is immense, and the relic of his right arm placed in the monastery bearing his name was greatly venerated and was also the source of healings as Michael reported. On the holy man, see L. Van Rompay, “Barṣawmo,” Gorgias Encyclopedia, p. 59. 3 See G. Kiraz, “al-Zaʿfarān, Dayr,” Gorgias Encyclopedia, p. 449. 4 On the Monastery of Barṣawmō see E. Honigmann, Le couvent de Barṣauma et le patriarcat jacobite d’Antioche et de Syrie, CSCO 146 (Leuven: Peeters, 1967). See also H. Takahashi, “Barṣawmo, Dayro d-Mor,” Gorgias Encyclopedia, pp. 60–61. On the ruins of the monastery, see A. Badwi and F. Baroudy, “Le couvent de Barsauma: Redécouverte du site,” ParOr 31 (2006), pp. 243–56. 5 This is also true in Ibn-Athīr, al-Kāmil, and in other medieval sources. The highly pejorative (if not sectarian) term ṣalībiyyūn “Cross-carrying people” seems to be a creation of the late 19th century to refer to Europeans in general. ix x THE CHRONICLE OF MICHAEL THE GREAT: BOOKS XV TO XXI Armenians. Militarily, Melitene, near which the Monastery of Mōr-Barṣawmō was located, was ransacked several times, and its monks deported. Even Edessa, “the Blessed City,” was not spared violence, having been conquered by Zangi (†1174), casting doubt on the belief among all Christians that it would never be subdued as promised by Christ.6 Ecclesiastically, the Syriac Orthodox Church during Michael’s patriarchate was marred by rebellious bishops and anti-patriarchs, problems that were partially due to the great insecurity that the Turkish invasion of Anatolia had created among the natives. Notwithstanding the prevailing violence in the society and his sometimes contested patriarchate, Michael the Great found time, clarity of mind, and determination to write a voluminous world chronicle, which he completed four years before he died in November 7, 1199. Michael the Great was probably not aware that his Chronicle would enjoy wide circulation, unlike, for example, the Chronicle of Zuqnīn or that of Dionysius of Tell-Maḥrē. It was copied a number of times, translated into Arabic (Garshuni) and into Armenian, and served as a major source for the polymath Metropolitan7 Bar- Hebraeus (1226–1286). And in this age of digitization, his Chronicle has been also digitized, and thus, its survival has become secure. THE ORGANIZATION OF THE CHRONICLE Unlike Bar-Hebraeus who wrote church and world histories in two separate volumes,8 Michael’s Chronicle combines these two histories in one large volume in two separate columns.9 He added a third column containing what we may call ‘natural history’ (usually referred to as variae), which includes celestial observations, earthquake reports, and meteorological conditions. He included chronological synchronistic tables placed at or near the beginning of each Book and in between chapters. He listed in these tables dates and names of ruling dynasties, including Turkish, Arab Caliphal, Frankish and Greek, using different computation systems: Seleucid, Nativity, the Olympiad and the Hegira, with the latter always associated with caliphal rulers. He added at the end of dynasties “sums of years,” that is the total years calculated periodically according to the Seleucid and Nativity 6 The belief is based on an apocryphal letter, said to have been sent by Jesus to Abgar, king of Edessa; see G. Howard, The Teaching of Addai, Texts and Translations 16 (Chico: SBL, 1981), p. 9. 7 The term Metropolitan ܘ is attested in inscriptions until the turn of the second millennium, and thereafter, the term maphryōnō (√ܝ) replaced it; Harrak, Syriac and Garshuni inscriptions, in EA.01.01 (possible 9th century) and EA.01.04 and FA.01.12 (year between 887 and 904) the title is Metropolitan, and in FA.02.13 (year 1123/4), the title is maphryōnō. For convenience, the term Metropolitan is systematically used in the present book. 8 See the ecclesiastical history in Barheb. Eccl. Hist., Barheb. Chr. Syr. 9 The Edessa-Aleppo Syriac Codex of the Chronicle of Michael the Great, edited by Gregorios Yuhanna Ibrahim, Text Summary by Sebastian P. Brock, Photographs Provided by Hill Museum & Manuscripts Library (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2009); hereafter Mich. Syr. INTRODUCTION xi computation systems. The Seleucid system begins in 311 BC and the Nativity began, according to Michael, when “our Lord was born on the 25th of First Kōnūn (December), the year 316,”10 which corresponds to the year AD 5! In the same table,11 he dates the first AD year to Sel. 317, which corresponds to AD 6 and Olympiad 195. With such evident miscalculation in dating the Nativity, even the 16th century Edessan copyist of Michael’s Chronicle was shocked, for he added a note below a chronological table12 as follows: “Know O brother that the computation of the years of Christ is entirely erroneous; I do not know if it is due to the copyist before us or to the author; pray for me.” The error appears to be Michael’s since he also miscalculated the Seleucid and the Hegira dating systems. The structure of the Chronicle and its historical contents were discussed in great detail by Dorothea Weltecke in a monograph.13 The chronological tables are reminiscent of the canones set by the 4th century Eusebius of Caesarea, which were expanded by Jacob of Edessa (640–708)14 to nearly the end of the 7th century. The tables were extended by Michael the Great from where Jacob of Edessa had stopped to the end of the 12th century. Jacob of Edessa likely inspired Michael in presenting chronology. Jacob and the Latin and Armenian versions of Eusebius’s canones,15 placed the chronological tables in the middle of each page on both sides of which basic information of interest to church and ‘natural’ histories is added. Eusebius concentrated his attention to ancient rulers mostly west of the Euphrates, while Jacob of Edessa was the first to also include Persian and later Arab (caliphal) rulers, a practice that was adopted by other Syriac chroniclers to cover later centuries. These chroniclers also adopted the computation systems of Eusebius, namely the Olympiad and the Seleucid, which they extended to the 12th century. 10 Mich. Syr. p. 91 column 3 (left): ̄ ܕ ܢ ̄ ܢ ܬܐܘ. 11 Mich. Syr., p. 91 (bottom). 12 Mich. Syr., p. 116 (column 3, bottom): .ܘܗ̄ ܕ ܕ̈ ܕ ܢܐ ܥܕ ܨ ܘܗ݁ ܘܐ݁ ܕ ܘܗ̄ ܘ ܥ݁ . 13 D. Weltecke, Die «Beschreibung der Zeiten» von Mōr Michael dem Grossen (1126–1199): Eine Studie zu ihrem historischen und historiographiegeschichtlichen Kontext, CSCO 595 (Leuven: Peeters, 2003). See also J. van Ginkel, “Michael the Great and his sources,” Journal of the CSSS 6 (2006), pp. 53–60. 14 The manuscript was edited by E.W. Brooks, “Chronicon Jacobi Edesseni,” in E.W. Brooks, I. Guidi, I.-B. Chabot, Chronica minora, vol. III (CSCO 5/Syr. 5; Paris 1905), pp. 261–330, and was translated into Latin by Brooks in id. (CSCO 6/Syr. 6; Paris 1905), pp. 197–258. See also E.W. Brooks, “The Chronological Canon of James of Edessa,” ZDMG 53 (1899), pp. 261–327; 54 (1900), pp. 100–2. 15 See subsequently Rudolph Helm, Eusebius Caesariensis Werke, Band 7: Die Chronik des Hieronymus, Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte 47 (Berlin: Academy-Verlag, 1956; repr. De Gruyter, 2012); Josef Karst, Die Chronik: aus dem Armenischen ubersetzẗ mit textkritischem Commentar, Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte 20 (Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1911). xii THE CHRONICLE OF MICHAEL THE GREAT: BOOKS XV TO XXI The innovation of Michael the Great consists of inserting the tables, not in continuity as in the canones, but in sections, and not in the middle of the page but at the bottom, after the titles of Books or within chapters. As with Eusebius and Jacob of Edessa, Michael gave the sums of years in Olympiad, Seleucid and Nativity, all placed after the listing of rulers, and added the sums of years in Hegira after the ruling caliph. The present edition its translation include these chronological tables in Syriac and English renderings. As an example, the following table16 explains how the Chronicler organised his dates, beginning with those on the right side: The Olympiad computation 4 3 2 1 4 = Sequence of a ruler within system is associated with the Turkish and Frankish Olympic Games of ancient dynasties.