In the early 1220's when Mongol
troops first passed through the Caucasus, the Armenian population,
living there and in many other localities across Asia Minor, dwelled
under considerably diverse circumstances. The many states in which
the Armenians were settled in the late 12th and early 13th centuries
had arisen as the result of the Saljuq Turkish invasions of the
mid 11th century, and for our purposes may be viewed as differing
from each other principally on the basis of the amount of political
and cultural autonomy enjoyed by their Arnenian inhabitants. The
nature of the Saljuq invasions/migrations and certain aspects
of the consequences of Turkish domination merit a brief examination
prior to reviewing the Turco-Mongol invasions/migrations of the
13-14th centuries because, in a certain sense, the invasions of
the 11th century were a dress rehersal for several subsequent
invasions of Armenia from the 0rient. A characterization of the
Saljuq invasions and domination will provide not only an introduction
to the complexities of medieval Armenian society, but also will
throw into sharper relief fundamental similarities and dissimilarities
with the Khwarazmian, Mongol, and Timurid invasions and administrations.
This chapter first examines briefly some of the more salient features
of political [64] history associated with the pre~Mongol period:
(1) the Saljuq invasions of the Armenian highlands; (2) the Turkish
domination and its consequences; and (3) the new situation created
by the resurgence of Georgia; the second part of the chapter details
the invasions of the 13-14th centuries.
The Turkish invasions and eventual political
domination of most parts of the Armenian highlands did not occur
at any one date, nor were they accomplished by any one group.
Rather, both as the contemporaries noted, and as modern scholars
have pointed out, from the early 11th century onward various parts
of Asia Minor were subjected to direct attack and to infiltration
which accompanied the invasions and settlement of diverse Turkic
groups there. Turkish migrations to Asia Minor continued from
the 11th through the 15th centuries, a period of approximately
400 years (114).
[65] The earliest references to Turkish
attacks date from ca. 1016 at which time the district of Vaspurakan
in southeastern Armenia was raided--not by Turkish armies--but
by Turkic mercenaries serving the Muslim emirs of Azarbaijan.
Around 1021 the area from Naxijewan to Dwin was raided by Turkmen
Oghuz(Ghuzz) nomads serving in the Persian Dailamite armies (115).
From 1029 onward, [66] various Turkmen groups commenced raiding
diverse parts of Armenia, from the direction of Azarbaijan to
the east as well as from northern Mesopotamia (116). In 1042 some
[67] 15,000 Turkmens from the Urmiah area attacked and looted
Vaspurakan and defeated Byzantine forces near the city of Archesh
on the northeastern shore of Lake Van, while yet another group
was raiding around Bjni in the northern district of Ayrarat (1042/43).
From 1045-63, detachments of Turks more or less controlled by
Saljuqid sultans and their generals penetrated deeper into Armenia,
destroying numerous cities and devastating entire districts: Ani
(attacked, 1045), Vagharshawan in the western district of Basen
(1047), the Mananaghi district of western Armenia (1048), Arcn
in the northwest (1048/49), Bayburt (1054), Melitene in the southwest,
Colonea in the northwest (1057), Sebastia/ Sivas (sacked, 1059),
Ani (captured, 1064), Kars (1065?), Caesarea (1067) and Manazkert
(1071), to mention only the better known sites (117). While it
appears that most of [68] historical Armenia had been subjected
to sack by 1070, it must be stressed that in several remote mountain
areas, small Armenian principalities continued their existence
throughout the11th and 12th centuries, although encircled by inimical
forces and under perpetual attack. These areas comprised districts
in northern and northeastern Armenia (Gugark', Siwnik', Arc'ax),
plus southern and southwestern Armenia (parts of Vaspurakan and
Mokk',and Sasun) (118). Consequently, it would be incorrect to
speak of "the Turkish conquest" as being fully consummated
in the 11th century. Some parts of Armenia never succumbed.
[69] Just as theTurkish conquests of
Armenia must be discussed with regard to a particular part of
the country at a particular time, so too the groups participating
should be distinguished from each other. The eminent Turcologist,
Claude Cahen, has demonstrated that from the very outset, two
elements participated in the invasions, conquests and settlement
of Asia Minor . Though perhaps ethnically the same people, these
two groups are distinguishable on the basis of their subordination
(or lack of it) to the Saljuq authorities. One group, which might
be called the Saljuq "regular army" consisted of elements
more or less obedient to the sultans and their generals. The other
group, the Turkmen nomads, appears in the sources as an almost
ungovernable force, interested solely in booty. [70] Indeed, quite
often the Turkmens disobeyed commands to resist plundering and,
what is important from the standpoint of the establishment of
any centralized Turkish state in the pre-Mongol period, Saljuq
sultans were frequently obliged to send armies against the Turkmens--fighting
Turkmen rebels almost as often, it would seem, as the autochthonous
populations (119). Furthermore, the nomadic pastoralist Turkmens
were the bane not only of the Saljuq authorities, and, of course,
of the sedentary Armenians, but also of the Muslim states which
bordered Armenia on the east (the Shaddadids of Ganjak in Caucasian
Aghbania) and south (the Marwanids), in the period of the invasions.
Each successive invasion--Saljuq, Khwarazmian, Mongol and Timurid--pushed
before it, brought along with it, or dragged in its wake into
Asia Minor thousands of these virtually uncontrollable nomadic
warriors who (when totally unchecked) devastated the cities searching
for plunder, destroyed the countryside and the complex irrigation
systems turning cultivated fields into pasturage for their sheep
herds, and reduced the possibilities for internal and international
trade by infesting the trade routes between cities, and attacking
caravans (120). Despite C. Cahen's [71] differentiation it remains
true, nonetheless, that whether a detachment of Turkmens pillaged
a given locale under orders from the sultan, or in defiance of
those orders, the results ordinarily were the same. Certainly
such fine points of distinction were lost on the victims themselves
who were killed or raped and led away into slavery. Even if the
obviously inflated figures of contemporary eye-witnesses are halved,
even if quartered, the extent of the damage occasioned by the
Saljuqs during the period of the conquest was and is dizzying
(121).
Turning now to some of the consequences
of the Saljuq invasions and domination vis-a--vis the Armenians,
a number of tendencies are observable· For the most part
the Saljuqs acted as catalysts on phenomena which predated their
arrival. One striking example of this is the dem- ographic change
observable in central Asia Minor (Cappadocia), northern Mesopotamia
and Syria. In the early 11th century, the Byzantine government
had followed a policy of removing powerful Armenian lords (naxarars)
and their dependents from their native Armenian habitats and settling
them to [72] the west and southwest (122). Thus Cappadocia and
Armenia Minor (P'ok'r Hayk'), areas which centuries earlier
had hosted sizeable Armenian populations suddenly became re-Armenized
on the eve of the Turkish invasions. The invasions quickened the
tempo of Armenian emigration and extended its range in a southwesterly
direction (into Cilicia) and [73] northward (into Georgia) (123).
The naxarars, relocating as [74] they did with sometimes
sizeable forces, occasionally were powers to be reckoned with.
Several such powerful and ambitious naxarars carved out
for themselves principalities over an extensive area stretching
from Cilicia on the Mediterranean, southward to Antioch, eastward
to Edessa, northward to Samosata, to Melitene/Malatya, and elsewhere
(124). However, it must be stressed that despite what appears
to have been large-scale emigration from Greater Armenia, those
departing (principally families of means) nonetheless constituted
a minority of the total indigenous population of eastern Asia
Minor which remained in situ [75] and overwhelmingly Armenian
in the period covered by this study (125).
[76] Another tendency of medieval Armenian
life receiving a stimulus (or perhaps, reaffirmation) from the
Saljuq domination was centrifugation, a key feature of Armenia's
socio-geopolitical system, naxararism (126). The Saljuqs
were even less successful than their Armenian predecessors (Arsacids,
Bagratids) in holding together in one state the different parts
of eastern Asia Minor. As was mentioned above, centrifugal tendencies
were inherent in the very nature of the Turkish migrations/invasions.
Furthermore, the ruling family of the Saljuqs--just as their Armenian
predecessors--was obliged to grant appanages to junior [77] members
and these "fiefdoms" quickly transformed themselves
from conditional to hereditary landholds (127). Indeed, prior
to the establishment of Saljuq control over much of the Armenian
highlands by the late 11th century, the proliferation of small
and usually mutually inimical Muslim emirates had begun. In the
east, embracing parts of eastern Armenia, Caucasian Aghbania,
and Azarbaijan was the emirate of Ganjak (ruled independently
from 1148 to 1225) (128). In the south, in the areas of Aghjnik'/Diyarbakr
and Xlat' the holdings of the Muslim Marwanid emirs quickly were
confiscated by the Artukids of Aghjnik' (1101-1231) (129), and
the Saljuqid Shah Armens of Xlat' (1100-1207) (130). In the west,
the Turkmen Danishmandids (1097-1165) ruled a large area including
Sebastia/Sivas, Caesarea, and Melitene/Malatya (131). Finally,
in the northwest, were the emirates of Karin/Erzerum (ruled by
the Saltukids ca. 1080-late 12th century) and Kars (ca. 1080-1200).
From 1118 Erzinjan and Divrigi belonged [78] to Mangujek, founder
of yet another dynasty (132). The ruling dynasties of these states
were sometimes joined together by marriage ties, or sometimes
united to fight a common enemy (usually Georgia to the north).
But more often they were at war with each other. Meanwhile, throughout
the 12th century the Saljuqid Sultanate of Rum, centered at Iconium/Konya
in the west, was constantly attempting to control one or another
of the above-mentioned states. As economic conditions stablized
by the end of the 12th century, Konya was indeed well on the way
to achieving its aim (133).
[79] The political, social and economic
fragmentation of Armenian states which accompanied the Turkish
invasions and a similar fragmentation of Turkish states resulting
in the proliferation of emirates was new neither to the Armenian
nor to the Turkish polity. Also not unexpectedly for naxarar
Armenia, the political fragmentation was accompanied by religious
fragmentation. Not only were numerous small Armenian political
entities engendered, but several kat'oghikoi (or anti-kat'oghikoi)
emerged in the 11-12th centuries. In this case, too, the confusion
created by the Saljuqs acted as a catalyst on a phenomenon of
hoary antiquity, which long predated their arrival (134).
The situation created by the overlordship
of ostensibly Muslim rulers over Christian Armenians across most
of the Armenian highlands was not new (135). Inasmuch as religious
and political agreement in the ancient world were often inseparable,
and because Armenia's powerful neighbors were determined to control
that state, the Armenians were no strangers to religious persecution
(136). Immediately prior [80] to the arrival of the Saljuqs the
Armenian people had been subjected to a bloody campaign of religious
persecution from Orthodox Byzantium (137). For this reason, and
because of the violently anti-Byzantine reaction such a policy
engendered, all segments of the Armenian population did not respond
in a uniform way either to the Saljuq invasions, or to the domination.
Indeed, some few Armeniane saw the anti-Byzantine Turks not as
the agents of God sent to punish Armenians for their sins, but
as an excellent vehicle opportunely available to themselves for
vengeance against the Greeks. The contemporary non-Armenian sources
in particular accuse the Armenians of siding with the Turks, deserting
from the Byzantine armies sent to "defend" Armenia,
and even joining the enemy (138).