Abbie Thompson, Level 3, BA History.
Preliminary note: This blog was submitted this year (2023-2024) as an assessment for the course HST3075M- The Armenians: Crafting Community, Communicating History. To launch the course blog https://the-armenians.blogs.lincoln.ac.uk/ , where further student work from over the years is published, and to celebrate the course, which has been running from 2018 at Lincoln and is one of the only courses on Armenian history in the country (and of a handful in the wider world), we publish here Abbie’s blog, which, through her nuanced look at Armenian Cilician culture in past and present times, highlights one of the preoccupations of the course- the historicised processes of making and unmaking of Armenian identity and culture. Thank you Abbie and thank you all HST3075 students past and present!
Dr Alyson Wharton(-Durgaryan), Senior Lecturer, School of Humanities and Heritage
Armenian identity has remained a strong and unique identity that has stood the test of time from the ancient era to the modern, but the medieval Armenian kingdom of Cilicia is used as the central point for this identity. The art and architecture produced in the period is still looked at today when considering the modern influences for Armenian nationalist identity, but they encompass many diverse aspects of different cultures’ styles. The fortresses of Anavarza and Hromkla represent the integration of iconography from other cultures mixed in with traditional Armenian architectural styles. Two examples of Gospel books produced by prominent Armenian artist Toros Roslin, the Zeytun Gospels and the Gospel Book made for Prince Levon II and his wife Lady Keran, offer an insight into how Cilician art was influenced by the cultures in the region and how the Armenians maintained and developed their own style. In the early twentieth century the study of medieval Armenian art took off in the United States, and after De-Stalinisation of the Soviet Union, led to the rediscovery of Toros Roslin. Cilicia remains relevant today through museums, most recently through the Metropolitan Museum’s ‘Armenia!’ exhibition. The journeys of the Gospel books of Roslin represent the history and struggles of the Armenian people, becoming the perfect representations for their modern identity. This blog will tackle how the Armenians in Cilicia developed and maintained their own distinctive identity and how and why it is still relevant today.
Cilicia
Situated in the north-east corner of the Mediterranean Sea, the region of Cilicia borders Turkiye to the north, Syria to the south- east, is surrounded by the Taurus Mountains, and at the time was characterised by two main areas: Cilicia Trachea and Cilicia Pedias (Vandekerckhove, 2020, 14).
Cilicia Trachea covered the majority of the mountains, characterised by rocky terrain and sheltered bays, with the centres of population being small and mainly situated on mountain passes and in port cities, with harbours being key for trade (Vandekerckhove, 2020, 14-5). Contrastingly, Cilicia Pedias consisted of a vast plain enclosed by the steep rocky slopes of the Taurus Mountains, a fertile yet marshy land containing the main cities of the region including Sis, the capital of the Armenian Kingdom (Vandekerckhove, 2020, 15-6). Between 969 and 1375, Cilicia was ruled by Armenian rulers, initially by powerful warlords who migrated from Greater Armenia due to their neighbours recurringly invading into the territory, then by kings from 1198 until its destruction in 1375 by the Mamluks (Payaslian, 2007,78, 100).
Armenian Cilicia became a prosperous society under its kings; under Levon I it became one of the centres of world trade with links to key trading cities such as Genoa and Venice (Payaslian, 2007, 85).
However, this period was most notably characterised by the Crusades which began in 1097, with Cilicia becoming a war zone between the armies of the Crusaders, Byzantines, Seljuk Turks, Mamluks, and Mongols. This consequently influenced the Armenian identity seen in art and architecture, but as this blog will explore, it still remained uniquely Armenian.
Map of the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia during the XIII century © Sémhur / Wikimedia Commons / CC-BY-SA-4.0, or Free Art License
Anavarza
As Cilicia turned into a war zone, the landscape became dominated with fortresses. Many fortresses in the region were not built by the Armenians but were instead originally built by the Romans, Byzantines, Arabs, and Crusaders for example, but the Armenians brought with them a highly developed architectural tradition dating back to the ninth century BCE and would alter these already existing structures into centres of Armenian cultural identity (Vandekerckhove, 2020, 117). An example of a fortress which encompasses these features is Anavarza, captured from Crusaders in the year 1111, who had in turn captured it from the Byzantines. Despite originally being a Byzantine fortress, Anavarza features many characteristics typical of Armenian fortifications; it follows the topography of the limestone outcrop it sits on, features walls constructed with rubble masonry, rounded rather than angular, and a bent entrance designed to slow down attackers, as well as wall walks and chapels built into the walls (Maranci, 2018, 93-4). Much like other key Armenian fortresses in Cilicia, Anavarza featured a strong religious presence at the time. Constructed sometime between 1111 and 1129, the church of Toros, named after the Rubenid prince Toros I, was situated inside the fortress and featured a central door on the south façade which bore a Greek inscription in a highly classicised sculptural style, appropriated from the Byzantine town of Anazarbus which sat below the fortress (Maranci, 2018, 94-5). In addition to this, an Armenian inscription erected at its foundation ran around the building, not engraved which was typically seen in Greater Armenia, but executed as a relief, typical of the Byzantine architectural style (Maranci, 2018, 96). The appropriation of Byzantine iconography combined with traditional Armenian characteristics is a perfect example of how the Armenians asserted power over the region and forged new relationships through the incorporation of other cultural styles.
Anavarza Castle, Adana, Turkey, 15 April 2014, photo by Nedim Ardoğa, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported
Hromkla and Toros Roslin
The monastery-fortress Hromkla, now known as Rumkale, was originally a Roman fortress which sits on the Euphrates River, but became a key Cilician stronghold for the Armenians in the thirteenth century (Evans, 2018, 141). Bought from the Frankish Counts of Edessa by the head of the Armenian Church, known as the Catholicos, in the mid-twelfth century to transfer their seat to a more militarily strategic area, it subsequently became the centre of Armenian religion (Watenpaugh, 2019, 51-2). Hromkla’s strategic location situated in between trade and diplomatic routes, as well as its generous patronage of the arts, attracted priests, poets, and artists, and it subsequently began to house rare manuscripts and sacred treasures (Watenpaugh, 2019, 51-2). Most importantly, the Catholicos Constantine (1221-1267) sponsored a scriptorium at Hromkla to produce luxury manuscripts for members of the clergy, nobility, and the royal family, combining Armenian cultural traditions with ideas from European Crusaders, Islamic art, and even Chinese influences (Watenpaugh, 2019, 55). One of the most famous artists whose work encompassed this new Cilician tradition was Toros Roslin. The only information known about him is from the colophons he wrote in the manuscripts he worked on, but as he only mentioned his patrons and not himself, very little is known about him except his name (Watenpaugh, 2019, 228). He was active at the scriptorium from 1256 until his supposed death in 1268, working primarily on gospel books for the elites of Cilicia (Watenpaugh, 2019, 230). The most important characteristics found in Roslin’s art are the close readings of biblical texts, deviation from traditional pictorial models, and the appropriation of Byzantine and Western European visual ideas (Maranci, 2018, 107).
Halfeti – Rumkale or Hromkla, photo by Argilli, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International
Zeytun Gospels
The most famous of these Gospel books is known as the Zeytun Gospels, named after a Cilician mountain town where it functioned as a liturgical object until it was uprooted in 1915 (Watenpaugh, 2019, 79). Made for Constantine himself, it took inspiration from past Armenian- Cilician creatives, such as his mentor and fellow artist Yovhannes and the scribe Saint Nerses of Lambron (Evans, 2018, 146). The Zeytun Gospels were created in 1256 to support the signing of papers for the union between the Armenian Church and the Roman Catholic Church, signed at Hromkla in 1251 (Evans, 2018, 146). The Gospel book was created during the period known as the Latin Empire when Crusaders took control of Constantinople from 1204 to 1261, therefore weakening Byzantine control and increasing Crusader influence (GTB, 390). Subsequently, European motifs feature heavily in this gospel book such as the Lamb of God, the representation of Jesus in the form of a lamb, which was common in European iconography but not seen in Armenian or Byzantine tradition (Watenpaugh, 2019, 256). The adaptation of Western themes into an Armenian art style not only represented this new union of churches, but also the strengthening of a connection with Europe through the incorporation of European and Roman Catholic motifs.
Toros Roslin (Armenian, active 1256 – 1268), Canon Table Page, folio, Getty Center: lido.getty.edu-gm-obj112322, Google Arts Institute: https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/wQEboBMbu9WeGA
Gospel Book of Lady Keran and Prince Levon II
Contrastingly, only produced six years later in 1262, a Gospel book created for and gifted to the son of King Hetum I, Prince Levon II, and his new wife, Lady Keran, as a wedding gift shows a strong Byzantine influence. The finest manuscripts of the period had shared a style and iconography with Byzantine tradition as they were once again the dominant Christian force in the region (GTB, 354). Subsequently, many Byzantine artistic features can be seen in this book such as the models facing the viewer, vivid definition of drapery, and well-articulated figures (GTB 446). It also features many features from royal Byzantine art such as Christ flanked by angels who bless their marriage and future rule, as well as Prince Levon wearing traditional Byzantine imperial dress (Evans, 2018, 150). This is representative of the ambition the rulers of Armenian Cilicia had to emulate and eventually surpass and replace the emperors of Byzantium as the dominant Christian force in the region (GTB, 354). The encompassing of other cultures’ art into their own enhanced Armenian art while still representing a strong unique cultural identity, but most importantly both examples showed an openness to other cultures and political and religious alliances.
Jerusalem, Armenian Patriarchate, MS 2660, Gospel, 1262, artist Toros Roslin, portrait of King Levon and Queen Keran. Photo: Garo of Jerusalem; https://cah.fresnostate.edu/armenianstudies/resources/artsofarmenia/miniatures.html
Modern History
After his death, Toros Roslin became relatively unknown for nearly seven centuries until priest and art historian Mesrob Der Movsisian published a master inventory of Armenian manuscripts between 1910-13, bringing his works to the forefront for the first time since the medieval period (Watenpaugh, 2019, 227). The most important of these works is the Zeytun Gospels. As mentioned previously, the Zeytun Gospels were uprooted from Cilicia in 1915 after a series of rebellions against the Ottoman army led to the deportation of Armenians from the town of Zeytun as part of the genocide (Watenpaugh, 2019, 112-4). After ending up in Marash, the Canon Tables were removed by the Atamian family who set off for the United States in July 1923 who used the pages as proof of the existence of Armenians during the genocide (Watenpaugh, 2019, 150). They arrived in New York later that month, along with a large part of the Armenian diaspora, and the Canon Tables went on to become central to Armenian art studies in the United States (Watenpaugh, 2019, 190).
Despite this, Roslin’s emergence as a key cultural figure didn’t happen until much later, beginning with art historian Sirarpie Der Nersessian, the founder of Armenian art history in Western academia (Watenpaugh, 2019, 207). In 1952, she was welcomed into the library of the Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople, where she found and examined the mother manuscript of the Canon Tables, the Zeytun Gospels, which had been transported from Marash at an unknown date, and subsequently published a brief article on Roslin’s career and a description of the Gospels (Watenpaugh, 2019, 211-2). For the first time since they were separated, she hypothesised that the Canon Tables brought to the US were in fact part of this larger manuscript (Watenpaugh, 2019, 213). Started in 1963 but posthumously published in 1993, her book Miniature Painting in the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia from the Twelfth to the Fourteenth Century became the most important study of Roslin and the Zeytun Gospels, and established Roslin as one of the key Armenian historical figures (Watenpaugh, 2019, 207).
For the Armenians in Armenia, 1965 represented a turning point; in April of that year, Moscow allowed them to commemorate the genocide for the first time in history, kickstarting the force of nationalism in Soviet Armenia (Panossian, 2006, 320). From 1967 to 1984, an eight volume History of the Armenian People was published by the History Institute of the National Academy of Sciences, dealing with ancient history, linguistics, and art, instilling a sense of pride in the Armenian people (Panossian, 2006, 328). This turning point also led to an increase in nationalist art and literature and a subsequent desire for historical Armenian national figures emerged (Panossian, 2006, 333). This combined with the studies of art historians abroad led to Toros Roslin becoming one of the most important Armenian national figures, represented, for example, by his statue situated in front of the Matenadaran, the Mesrop Mashtots Institute of Ancient Manuscripts, in the capital of Armenia, Yerevan, erected in 1967 (Watenpaugh, 2019, 231). The modern history of Toros Roslin and his works encompasses the survival of Armenian culture not only in times of war but also during a time when their culture was being actively eradicated, indicating not only a strong identity but strong cultural connections, similar to the medieval Cilician kingdom.
Toros Roslin statue designed by Mark Grigoryan and sculpted by Arsham Shahinyan in 1967, Matenadaran, Yerevan, Armenia, photo by Benoît Prieur Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication
Armenia!
More recently, the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York hosted an exhibition from September 2018 to January 2019 titled ‘Armenia!’ which featured a large amount of art from Armenian Cilicia, including the Canon Tables and other pages from the Zeytun Gospels. This exhibition included key details of the art itself, such as the provenance and style of the piece, emphasising the fact that the art was influenced not only by traditional Armenian art but also the other cultures Cilicia was surrounded by. This exhibition highlighted Armenian art for a public audience, emphasising the important history of the Armenian people and how their identity flourished despite hardship from the Crusades in the medieval period up to the genocide of the Armenian people and culture in the twentieth century. The art featured also went on their own cross-cultural journeys similar to how they were created in Cilicia, travelling between different countries and cultures and ending up being displayed to a wide range of people, paralleling how the art itself took inspiration from the many cultures situated in Cilicia. Overall, the art and history of Armenia is intrinsically linked, with the art representing the strong identity and cultural influence of the Armenians throughout time.
