Dickran Kouymjian, Cilicia and Its Catholicosate from the Fall of the Kingdom to 1915,” Armenian Cilicia, UCLA Armenian History & Culture Series, Historic Armenian Cities and Provinces, Richard G. Hovannisian, Simon Payaslian, eds. (Costa Mesa: Mazda, 2008), pp. 297-307. (original) (raw)
Related papers
The paper focuses on three moments in the history of Cilicia and its Catholicosate between 1375 and 1915. They relate to the period after the fall of the last Armenian kingdom, the reestablishment of the Catholicosate in Echmiadzin, and the crises between the patriarchal sees of Sis, Echmiadzin, and Constantinople.
_ Cilicia and Its Catholicosate from the Fall of the Armenian Kingdom in 1375 to 1915
The paper focuses on three moments in the history of Cilicia and its Catholicosate between 1375 and 1915. 1 They relate to the period after the fall of the last Armenian kingdom, the reestablishment of the Catholicosate in Echmiadzin, and the crises between the patriarchal sees of Sis, Echmiadzin, and Constantinople. 2 1 I have covered the first two centuries of this period in Dickran Kouymjian, "L'Arménie sous les dominations des Turcomans et des Ottomans (XV e-XVI e siècles)," in Histoire de l'Arménie et du peuple arméniens, ed. Gérard Dédéyan
2019
XIII c., lVliniature attributed to Toros Roslin @ Mesrop Mashtots Matenadaran, MS. E32f) Back: Cilician Armenia and neighboring states in the Catalan Atlas attributed to Abraham Cresques (O Bibliothdque Nationale de tr'rance, D6partement des manuscrits, Espa gnol 30). FOREWORD One of the most important achievements in Armenology is the two hundred-plus years of multilateral study of Cilician Armenian history. The main sources, first brought out by the efforts of Mikayel Chamchian (1786), Edouard Dulaurie (1861), Victor Langlois (1863), I-evond Ali5an (1865), Grigor Mikaelyan (1952), Sargis Bornazian (1973) and others, created discussion on the turning points of Cilicia's intemal and foreign policy. The '80s of the 20th century were marked by renewed interest in the history of the Cilician Armenian state. Scholars began comparing information in the official Cilician historiography with that of Byzantine, Latin, Syriac, Arab and Persian sources. The history of Cilician Armenia was being discussed more frequently within the broad context of world history, arousing the interest of such scholars as Byzantinist F. Chalandone; specialists in the Crusades R.
The Restoration of the Catholicosate of the Great House of Cilicia After Exile
Quaestio Rossica
The Catholicosate of the Great House of Cilicia played an important role in the life of the Armenians of Cilicia. The history of the Catholicosate is divided into two historical periods: “Cilician” and “Diasporian”. This article focuses on the “Diasporian” period of one of the Hierarchical Sees of the Armenian Church in the 1920s–1930s. The historiography of Armenia has never given serious attention to the investigation of the History of the Catholicosate of Cilicia, particularly with respect to the issue of the forced exile of the Catholicosate and the process of its diasporization in the 1920s–1930s. This article focuses on those issues, analyzing the process of diasporization of the Cilician See, its reconstruction under the new circumstances, and its establishment in Antelias (Lebanon). Not all refugees or migrants create a diaspora community, in fact, the most likely result of both voluntary and forced dispersions is assimilation into the host country’s culture. From the analyt...
CILICIAN ARMENIA IN THE PERCEPTIONS OF ADJACENT POLITICAL ENTITIES i
"Gituthyun" publishing House of the NAS RA, 2019
The book consists of three parts. The first part is dedicated to the analysis of the Byzantine sources (A. Bozoyan); in the second part R. Shukurov reveals the data of the Seljuqid Persian sources relating to contact between the Iconium Sultanate and the Cilician Armenian State, while V. Ter-Ghevondian and G. Danielyan deal with the ruling house of the Cilician kingdom and the peculiarities of perception of that state’s civil and ecclesial heads in major Near Eastern documents.
Samvel Grigoryan Independent historian, Moscow, T‘agawor, Korol‘ or Czar: The Impact of Soviet-Western Relations on the Historiography of the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia The Cold War had its negative effect not only on the political prospects of Armenian people, now divided by the Iron Curtain, but also on historical studies in the USSR, including the study of the history of the Armenian medieval kingdom of Cilicia in the 11th-14th centuries. This paper examines why this effect occurred, how it developed and what distortions and other negative consequences it brought to. Narrating the genesis of Cilician Armenia, Prof. Sirarpie Der-Nersessian wrote: “For the first time in their history, the Armenians became masters of the country which had an outlet to the sea and direct communication with the peoples of the West.” The close and immediate contacts with the Franks of the Latin East and other Western Europeans favored the development of the Armenian kingdom along the Western-European model. To some extent, it was a “westernized” Armenian state, a European Armenia. That is why the historiography of Cilician Armenia came into collision with Soviet Cold War-era ideology, a major component of which was anti-Western propaganda. Before WWII and even by the beginning of the Cold War, the Soviet authorities and historians were mainly oblivious to the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia. However, the end of this “period of oblivion” would signify the beginning of the writing of the history of this kingdom “in light of Soviet propaganda”. This change in approach of the Soviet authorities towards the historiography of Cilician Armenia occurred in 1940s due to three objectives: (a) to gain the sentiments of the Armenian public, including the sentiments of the Diasporan Armenians, during World War II; (b) to use the “Armenian factor” in Soviet relations with Turkey; and (c) to ensure the ideological backing of the Diaspora Armenians for the repatriation campaign which began in 1946.