All
 
|
 
 


The Caucasian Territorial Churches and the Sāsānid Commonwealth
 
PIIS086919080017082-7-1
DOI10.31857/S086919080017082-7
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Frank Schleicher 
Occupation: Privatdozent
Affiliation: Friedrich Schiller University
Address: Jena, Jena, Germany
Journal nameVostok. Afro-Aziatskie obshchestva: istoriia i sovremennost
EditionIssue 5
Pages82-93
Abstract

At the beginning of the sixth century, the kingships in Caucasian Iberia and Albania were eliminated by the Sāsānids. Thus, the system of vassal kings that served well for centuries was suddenly replaced by direct rule across the board. In this study, we want to ask why this change suddenly became possible. For the Sāsānian administration always needed a central contact person in the countries who could control the local nobility. It is striking that the establishment of a strong church structure always preceded the end of kingship. This can be seen particularly well in the example of Armenia, whose kingship had already been eliminated a century earlier. It is therefore reasonable to assume that after the end of kingship in Armenia as well as in Iberia and Albania, the regional churches took over its central functions of cooperation with the Sāsānian central administration. Now the church served the administration as an important local power factor, and allowed it he control of the powerful dynastic clans. Despite occasional conflicts, the churches cooperated with the Sāsānids and they were able to benefit greatly from this cooperation. Their advantages consisted in access to financial resources and, above all, in strengthening their position of power vis-à-vis the leaders of the local noble clans. Ecclesiastical power reached its peak when the Katholikoi finally also led their countries politically, as Kiwrion did in the case of Iberia at the beginning of the seventh century. Thus, the church became the state-forming institution in the Caucasian countries.

KeywordsIberia, Albania, Church, Vassal, Sasanian history, Armenian history, Catholicos, Caucasus, Caucasian kingship
Received08.10.2021
Publication date29.10.2021
Number of characters35503
Cite   Download pdf To download PDF you should sign in
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.
Размещенный ниже текст является ознакомительной версией и может не соответствовать печатной

Table of contents

1. Church and Kingdom
2. The church and the Sāsānid administration
ABBREVIATIONS
1 The settlement between the Roman emperor Theodosius I (379–395) and the Sāsānid šāhān šāh Šāpūr III (383–388) about the division of Armenia in 387 resolved the longstanding conflict over the Caucasian regions and laid the foundation for a peaceful cooperation in the fifth century [BP, 6, 1 (p. 233– Garsoïan, 1989); Prok. aed., 3, 1, 9. See e.g.: Blockley, 1985; 1987, p. 222; 1992, p. 39. a. Toumanoff, 1963, p. 152]. The clear division of spheres of influence cleared the way for the establishment of permanent imperial dominion in the regions concerned. In this short study, we want to look at the administrative side of the exercise of power on the part of the Sāsānids, because they held the largest part of Caucasia with four fifths of Armenia, and all of Iberia and Albania.
2 At the beginning, the Sāsānids leaned on the traditional form of exercise of power, the vassal kingdom. However, they soon stroke a new path: First, the Armenian kingdom was abolished, and later also the kingdoms in Albania and Iberia. The indirect dominion had been superseded by direct dominion. Apart from periods of resistance, the new model was indeed successful and the dominion over Caucasia was secure until the seventh century. But why was this direct dominion suddenly possible and why was a local king no longer needed to control the powerful dynastic clans of Caucasia? Apparently, the church had become an important pillar for the exercise of power and superseded the kingship as a central authority.
3 The basis for this study is a statement of the Arsen Sapareli (830–887), a Georgian bishop1. The text of Arsen is a treatise justifying retrospectively the role of the Iberian church at the beginning of the seventh century with the schism of the Armenian church2. There can be found the following statement: 1. For Arsen and his living environment see the extensive introduction in: [Alekʽsiże, Mahé, 2010, p. 62; Alekʽsiże, 2018(a), p. 65].

2. For the Iberian-Armenian schism see esp. [Alekʽsiże, 2018(a)], who claims (p. 65) that Arsen’s text is not a polemic one but rather an attempt to incorporate the (chalcedonic) Armenian people of Tao into the Georgian church. For the schism see e.g.: [Garsoïan, 1999; Martin-Hisard, 2005, p. 1293ff; Essays on the History of Georgia, 1988, p. 165].
4 Even more, certain Catholicoi and bishops were made sons by the king of the Persians and they were addressed by Kavādh and Ḵosrow adoptive sons. And they seized the rights of the state for their own benefit. They did not behave according to the canonical rule, but according to their own ideas. They did not spend the means of the church according to the law, but for themselves and for their own representation [Arseni Sapareli, 11, 3; Alekʽsiże, Mahé, 2010, p. 115].
5 What makes this statement interesting is that several bishops – obviously only Armenian bishops – are said to be adopted sons of the šāhān šāh. This opened up the question if the Sāsānids had to use special instruments to work with the clerical authorities. How can the adoption be understood and what goal did the Sāsānids pursue?
6 The statement of Arsen makes it probable that the bishops used certain rights of the state for personal interests. Thus, the adoption had to be related to mundane stately purposes. In this specific case, the embezzlement of financial means seems feasible, used for personal representation instead of their original purpose. Therefore, the bishops must have been responsible for the levy of certain dues. Their close relation to the šāhān šāh suggests that those were at least the dues that had to be paid to the Sāsānid central administration, in a sense of ‘tribute’.3 In specific cases, the Armenian church, therefore, assumed the functions of the civil administration. As Armenia was at least formally under Sāsānid rule, this means nothing else than that the Armenian church has to be seen as part of the Sāsānid administration or rather had been utilized as such. As we saw, Arsen explicitly mentioned two Sāsānids: Kavādh I (488–531) and his son Ḵosrow I Anuširwān (531–579). Now both of these rulers are the ones connected to extensive administrative reforms in the Sāsānid empire. Apart from a comprehensive fiscal reform and a ‘re-measurement’ of the country related to it as well as the establishment of a bigger standing army, this consolidation phase also contained a crucial shift in the administration of Caucasia [Pourshariati, 2008, p. 83]: The vassal kings that were in charge of the land before were exchanged for a direct rule. Armenia, where the kingdom ended already in 428, falls a bit out of alignment, but the Albanian kingdom had been abolished verifiably around 510 and the Iberian kingdom in the 530s.4 Temporarily, there was a transitional phase in which there could be found a Persian marzpān, a provincial governor, next to the king of Albania as well as of Iberia, respectively [Schleicher, 2019, p. 87]. The route from the vassal rule to a direct one was thus a long-term development and not a clear cut, but it stands in direct connection with the reforms of Kavādh I. that were carried on successfully by his son Ḵosrow I. 3. This of course does not mean that they only levied these dues; definitely, charges for the upkeep of the churches had to be levied.

4. Albania: [Gadjiev, 2015], Iberia: [Schleicher, 2019]. The case of Armenia: in the same period, the short-lived marzpānat of the Mamikonean family ended on the command of Kavādh I [Grousset, 1947, p. 233].
7 If one wanted to exert direct rule in the Caucasus, however, he would be confronted with the problem that all these regions were strongly dynastically shaped. The proper rule here lay always with the powerful aristocrats and dynasts.5 The Iberian kingdom had, for example, never been the powerful central authority the medieval Georgian sources wanted to make us believe. The same holds true for Armenia and Albania. The king was always only primus inter pares, whose power depended on the number of noblemen he could muster behind him or if he was able to rely on an external power (Rome / Sāsānids / North Caucasians)6. However, the kingdom was at least the connecting central authority the šāhān šāh (or of course the Roman emperor) could call on to control the respective area formally. His function was especially firmly established in the traditional sense. The Armenian sources nicely show the difficulties the Persian marzpāns had to endure in the fifth century to assert themselves in the country or rather enforce the Sāsānid interests7. The situation was similar in Albania and Iberia. 5. Thus Movsēs Xorenacʽi (3, 58, see at: [Thomson, 1978, p. 330] already stated: The king of Persia, Bahrām (V.), knowing that without the Armenian princes he could not hold the country, … For a detailed study of the dynastic structures in the roman part of Armenia see: [Adontz, Garsoïan, 1970].

6. For the nature of the Iberian kingdom see: [Rapp, 2014, esp. p. 265, 281ff]. Exemplary for the Parthian conditions see: [Widengren, 1969, p. 81].

7. How much the Persian Great King was dependent on the cooperation of the local nobility show the events prior to the Armenian uprising of 450/1 described by Łazar Pʽarpecʽi [Łazar Pʽarpecʽi, 25–31; Thomson, 1991, p. 84–101].

Price publication: 0

Number of purchasers: 2, views: 539

Readers community rating: votes 0 

1. Ačaṙyan H. Etymological Root Dictionary of the Armenian Language. 5 vol. 2nd ed. Yerevan: Yerevan State University, 1972 (in Armenian).
2. Adontz N. Armenia in the Period of Justinian (trad. Garsoïan N.). Louvain, 1970.
3. Akinean N. Kiwrion, Catholicos of the Georgians. Vienna, 1910 (in Armenian).
4. Alekʽsiże Z. The Book of Letters. Tbilisi, 1968 (in Georgian).
5. Alekʽsiże Z. The Book of Letters. Armenian Text with Georgian Translation, Study and Commentary. Tbilisi, 1993 (in Georgian).
6. Alekʽsiże N. The Narrative of the Caucasian Schism. Memory and Forgetting in Medieval Caucasia. Louvain: Peeters Publishers, 2018(1).
7. Alekʽsiże N. Caucasia: Albania, Armenia, and Georgia. Eds. J. Lössl, N.J. Baker‐Brian. A Companion to Religion in Late Antiquity, Hoboken:  Wiley-Blackwell, 2018(2). Pp. 135–156.
8. Alekʽsiże Z., Mahé J.-P. (eds.). Arsen Sapareli. Sur la séparation des Géorgiens et des Arméniens. Revue des Études Arméniennes. Vol. 32. 2010. Pp. 59–132.
9. Arsene Sapareli. On the Separation of Georgians and Armenians. Ed. Z. Alekʽsiże. Tbilisi, 1980 (in Georgian).
10. Blockley R.C. Ed. The History of Menander the Guardsman. Liverpool: F. Cairns, 1985.
11. Blockley R.C. The Division of Armenia between the Romans and the Persians. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte. Bd. 36. 2. No. 36. 1987. Pp. 222–234.
12. Blockley R.C. East Roman Foreign Policy. Formation and Conduct from Diocletian to Anastasius. Leeds: Cairns, 1992.
13. Čʽxeiże Tʽ. About the term pitiaxši. Axlo aġmosavletʽi da sakʽartʽvelo (=The Near East and Georgia). 1999. No. 2. Pp. 195–202 (in Georgian).
14. Christensen A. L'Iran sous les Sassanides. Copenhague: E. Munksgaard, 1944, 2nd ed.
15. Dowsett C.J.F. (ed.). The History of the Caucasian Albanians by Movsēs Dasxuranċi. London – New York: Oxford University Press, 1961.
16. Elishe: History of Vardan and the Armenian War. Ed. E. Tēr-Minasean. Yerevan, 1957 (in Armenian).
17. Essays on the History of Georgia. Vol. 2. Georgia in the 4th–10th centuries. Eds. M.D. Lordkipanidze, D.L. Muskhelishvili. Tbilisi: Metsniereba, 1988 (in Russian).
18. Gadjiev M.S. Chronology of Albanian Arsacids. Albania Caucasica. Issue 1. Мoscow: IOS RAS, 2015. Pp. 68–75 (in Russian).
19. Garitte G. Ed. La Narratio de rebus Armeniae. Corpus scriptorum Christianorum orientalium. Vol. 132. Subsidia. T. 4. Louvain: L. Durbecq, 1952.
20. Garsoïan N.G. (ed.). The Epic Histories Attributed to Pʽawstos Buzand (Buzandaran Patmutʽiwnkʽ). Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1989.
21. Garsoïan N. L’Église arménienne et le Grand schisme d’Orient. Louvain: Peeters, 1999 (with part. French transl. of GTʽ).
22. The Book of Letters Ed. N. Połarean. Jerusalem: St. James, 1994 (in Armenian).
23. Greenwood T. Ed. The Universal History of Stepʽanos Tarōnecʽi: Introduction, Translation, and Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
24. Grousset R. Histoire de l’Arménie des origines à 1071. Paris: Pauot, 1947.
25. Hewsen R.H. The Geography of Ananias of Sirak (Ašxarhacʽoycʽ). The Long and Short Recensions. Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1992.
26. Javakhov I.  State system of ancient Georgia and ancient Armenia. Vol. 1. SPb.: Printing House of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, 1905 (in Russian).
27. The Life of Kartli. Ed. S. Qauxčʽišvili. Vol. 1. Tʽbilisi. 1955 (in Georgian).
28. Khurshudyan E.S. State Institutes of Parthian and Sassanian Iran. 3rd century BC – 7th century AD. Almaty: Publishing House “Institute of Asian Studies”, 2015. (in Russian).
29. Lang D.M. (ed.). The Passion of St. Eustace the Cobbler. Lives and Legends of the Georgian Saints. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1956. Pp. 94–114.
30. Łazar Pʽarpecʽi. The History of the Armenians. Eds. G Tēr-Mkrtčʽean, S. Malxasean. Tbilisi, 1904 (in Armenian).
31. Mahé J.-P. Vačagan III le Pieux et le culte des reliques. Revue des Études Arméniennes. Vol. 35. 2013. Pp. 113–128.
32. Markwart J. Die Bekehrung Iberiens und die beiden ältesten Dokumente der iberischen Kirche. Caucasica. Fasc. 7. 1931. Pp. 111–167.
33. Martin-Hisard B. Das Christentum und die Kirche in der georgischen Welt. von Charles und Piétri L. Eds. Die Geschichte des Christentums. Bd. Altertum 3. 2nd ed. Freiburg: Herder, 2005. Pp. 1231–1305.
34. The Martyrdom of St. Eustace. Monuments of Ancient Georgian Hagiographic Literature. Ed. I. Abulaże. Vol. 1. Tbilisi, 1963–64. Pp. 11–29 (in Georgian).
35. Meyendorff P. Imperial Unity and Christian Divisions. The Church 450–680 A.D. New York: St Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1989.
36. Movsēs Dasxurancʽi. The History of the Country of Albania. Ed. V. Aṙakʽelyan. Yerevan, 1983 (in Armenian).
37. Movsēs Xorenacʽi. The History of the Armenians. Eds. M. Abełean, S. Yarutʽiwnean. Tbilisi, 1913 (in Armenian).
38. Neressian S. Une apologie des images du septième siècle. Byzantion. XVII. 1944–1945. Pp. 58–87.
39. Letter of Patriarch Photius to Zachariah, Catholicos of Armenia. Ed. Akinean N. Handes Amsorya. Vol. 82. 1968. Pp. 65–100 (in Armenian).
40. Plontke-Lüning A. Culture and Art in the Gogarene in the 5th and 6th Centuries. Iberians and Armenians in Dialoque. Bacci M., Kaffenberger Th., Studer-Karlen M. Eds. Cultural Interactions in Medieval Georgia. Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag, 2018. Pp. 187–205.
41. Pourshariati P. Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire. The Sasanian-Parthian Confederacy and the Arab Conquest of Iran. London – New York: I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd, 2008.
42. Ps.-Pʽawstos. The Epic Histories. St. Petersburg, 1883 (in Armenian).
43. Rapp St.H. Christian Caucasian Dialogues. Glimpses of Armeno-Kʽartʽvelian Relations in Medieval Georgian Historiography. Peace and Negotiation. Strategies for Coexistence in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Ed. D. Wolfthal. Turnhout: Brepols Publishers, 2000. Pp. 163–178.
44. Rapp St.H. The Sasanian World through Georgian Eyes. Caucasia and the Iranian Commonwealth in Late Antique Georgian Literature. Farnham: Routledge, 2014.
45. Schleicher F. Die Gogarene im ausgehenden fünften Jahrhundert. Politische Handlungsspielräume und religiöser Pragmatismus. Anabasis. Studia Classica et Orientalia. Vol. 8. 2017. Pp. 226–257.
46. Schleicher F. Die Chronologie der kʽartʽvelischen Könige. Das Ende des iberischen Königtums. Iberien zwischen Rom und Iran. Beiträge zur Geschichte und Kultur Transkaukasiens in der Antike. Eds. F. Schleicher, T. Stickler, U. Hartmann. Stuttgart: Steiner, 2019. Pp. 69–98.
47. Sebeos. Patmutʽiwn Sebēosi. Ed. G.V. Abgaryan. Yerevan, 1979.
48. Shahbazi A.Sh. Bahrām VI Čōbīn. Encyclopædia Iranica. 3.5. 1988. Pp. 514–522.
49. Shurgaia G. La riforma ecclesiastica di Vaxt’ang I Gorgasali, re di Kartli († 502). Orientalia christiana periodica. 78. 2012. Pp. 393–438.
50. Stepʽanos Taronecʽi. The Universal History. Ed. G. Manukyan. Matenagirkʽ Hayocʽ 10th Century Book 2. Vol. 15. Antʽilias 2012. Pp. 617–829 (in Armenian).
51. Sukiasyan A.G. The Socio-Political System and Law of Armenia in the Era of Early Feudalism (3rd–9th Centuries). Yerevan: Yerevan University Publishing House, 1963 (in Russian).
52. Sundermann W. Bidaxš. Encyclopædia Iranica. Vol. 4.3. 1989. Pp. 242–244.
53. Tarchnishvili M. Die Entstehung und Entwicklung der kirchlichen Autokephalie Georgiens. Kyrios. Bd. 5. 1940/41. Pp. 177–193 (repr. Muséon. 73. 1960. Pp. 107–126).
54. Thomson R.W. (ed.). Moses Khorenatsʽi. History of the Armenians. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978.
55. Thomson R.W. (ed.). Eḷishē. History of Vardan and the Armenian War. Cambridge, MA, 1989.
56. Thomson R.W. (ed.). The History of Łazar Pʽarpecʽi. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991.
57. Thomson R.W. (ed.). Rewriting Caucasian History. The Medieval Armenian Adaption of the Georgian Chronicles. The Original Georgian Texts and the Armenian Adaption. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996.
58. Thomson R.W., Howard-Johnston J., Greenwood T. (eds.) The Armenian History Attributed to Sebeos. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1999.
59. Toumanoff C. Christian Caucasia Between Byzantium and Iran. New Light from Old Sources. Traditio. Vol. 10. 1954. Pp. 109–189.
60. Toumanoff C. Studies in Christian Caucasian History. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press, 1963.
61. Trever K.V. Essays on the History and Culture of Caucasian Albania of the 4th century BC – 7th century AD. Moscow – Leningrad: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1959 (in Russian).
62. Turtledove H. Justin II‘s Observance of Justinian’s Persian Treaty of 562. Byzantinische Zeitschrift. Bd. 76. 1983. Pp. 292–301.
63. Uxtanes. Istoria gamoqopʽisa kʽartʽveltʽa somextʽgan. Ed. Z. Alekʽsiże. Tʽbilisi. 1975. Engl. transl.: Arzoumanian Z. Ed. Bishop Ukhtanes of Sebastia. History of Armenia, Pt. 2, History of the Severance of the Georgians from the Armenians, Fort Lauderdale: Self Published, 1985.
64. van Esbroeck M. Vakhtang Gorgasali et l’évêque Mikael de Mtskheta. Khintibidze E. Ed. Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Kartvelian Studies. Tbilisi: Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, 1993. Pp. 9–23.
65. Widengren G. Der Feudalismus im alten Iran. Männerbund – Gefolgswesen – Feudalismus in der iranischen Gesellschaft im Hinblick auf indogermanische Verhältnisse. Köln: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 1969.

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up