View source for Franco-Mongol alliance
From RoyalWeb
Jump to:
navigation
,
search
=====Armenian medieval sources===== [[Image:ChurchOfTheHolySepulcher1885.png|thumb|According to Western and Armenian tradition, King [[Hetoum II]] visited the [[Church of the Holy Sepulchre]] in [[Jerusalem]], in early 1300, though this account is disputed.]] A single Armenian account by the monk [[Nerses Balients]] (an Armenian monk converted to Catholicism by the [[Dominican Order|Dominicans]])<ref>Mutafian, p.73</ref> relates the capture of Jerusalem by the Mongols, and describes a prominent involvement of the Armenian king [[Hetoum II]] in the invasion. Of this account, the modern French historian Demurger said, "There is a tradition that Hethoum celebrated a religious office at the Saint-Sepulcre on the day of the Epiphany (January 6).<ref>Demurger, p.143: "There is a tradition that Hethoum celebrated a religious office at the Saint-Sepulcre on the day of the Epiphany (January 6th)."</ref> Dr. Schein listed in both her 1979 paper and 1991 book ''Fidelis Crucis'' the account of Nerses Balients which stated that the Armenian King [[Hetoum II]], with a small force, had reached the outskirts of Cairo and then spent some fifteen days in Jerusalem visiting the [[Holy Places]] after its capture by the Mongols: {{quote|"The king of Armenia, back from his raid against the Sultan, went to Jerusalem. He found that all the enemies had been put to flight or exterminated by the Tatars, who had arrived before him. As he entered into Jerusalem, he gathered the Christians, who had been hiding in caverns out of fright. During the 15 days he spent in Jerusalem, he held Christian ceremonies and solemn festivities in the Holy Sepulchre. He was greatly comforted by his visits to the places of the pilgrims. He was still in Jerusalem when he received a certificate from the Khan, bestowing him Jerusalem and the surrounding country. He then returned to join Ghazan in Damas, and spend the winter with him"|[[Recueil des Historiens des Croisades]], Historiens Armeniens I, p.660<ref>[http://visualiseur.bnf.fr/CadresFenetre?O=NUMM-51557&M=imageseule Historiens Armeniens, p.660]</ref>}} <!-- This source is controversial and not accepted as reliable by all historians. --> [[Image:Cathedral of St. James .JPG|thumb|It may be on the occasion of a visit to Jerusalem in 1300 that Hetoum II remitted his amber scepter to the Armenian convent of [[Cathedral of St. James, Jerusalem|Saint James of Jerusalem]].]] According to the historian Claude Mutafian, this may be on this occasion that Hetoum II remitted his amber scepter to the Armenian convent of [[Cathedral of St. James, Jerusalem|Saint James of Jerusalem]].<ref>Mutafian, p.73</ref> In her 1991 book, Schein expanded her earlier statement to say that the Armenian information about Hetoum's visit was confirmed by Arab chroniclers.<ref>Schein, ''Fidelis Crucis'', p. 163. "According to an Armenian source confirmed by Arab chroniclers, Hetoum II with a small force reached the outskirts of Cairo and then spent some fifteen days in Jerusalem visiting the Holy Places.</ref> However, Schein's interpretation of the Armenian involvement has been challenged by Angus Donal Stewart in his 2001 book ''The Armenian Kingdom and the Mamluks'', where he called the Armenian statement an "absurd claim" from an unreliable source, and said that the Arab chroniclers did not confirm an Armenian involvement in the capture of Jerusalem by the Mongols.<ref>Stewart, p. 14. "At one point, 'Arab chroniclers' are cited as being in support of an absurd claim made by a later Armenian source, but on inspection of the citations, they do no such thing." Also Footnote #55, where Stewart further criticizes Schein's work: "The Armenian source cited is the ''[[RHC Arm. I]]'' version of the 'Chronicle of the Kingdom', but this passage was in fact inserted into the translation of the chronicle by its editor, Dulaurier, and originates in the (unreliable) work of [[Nerses Balienc]]... The "Arab chroniclers" cited are [[Mufaddal]] (actually a Copt; the edition of Blochet), [[al-Maqrizi]] (Quatremere's translation) and [[al-Nuwayrf]]. None of these sources confirm Nerses' story in any way; in fact, as is not made clear in the relevant [Schein] footnote, it is not the text of al-Nuwayrf that is cited, but D.P. Little's discussion of the writer in his ''Introduction to Mamluk Historiography'' (Montreal 1970; 24-27), and in that there is absolutely no mention made of any Armenian involvement at all in the events of the year. It is disappointing to find such a cavalier attitude to the Arabic source material."</ref> Another historian, Reuven Amitai, also did a detailed comparison of all of the available primary sources about the events around the [[Battle of Wadi al-Khazindar]], and concluded that the Armenian account was in error, as it did not match up with other similar sources about the same events, was provably full of exaggerations and inaccuracies, and had been written as to glorify the Armenian king Hetoum. Amitai also pointed out that despite Dr. Schein's acceptance of the Armenian source as genuine, that even the original editor of the work, [[Edouard Dulaurier]], had "unequivocally" denied the veracity of the Armenian account.<ref>''Mongol Raids'', p. 246. "A less charitable attitude can be taken towards the other Armenian source, written by the anonymous continuator of Constable Smpad's work. His account is full of exaggerations and inaccuracies, the first of which is the year given for the campaign (751 of the Armenian calendar which equals 5 Jan. 1302 - 4 Jan. 1303). This unknown writer does not even mention Mulay or the Mongols in the raid into Palestine. In their stead only King Het'um of Armenia is found: after the victory of Hims, the king rushed forward to pursue the fleeing sultan. He was joined by 4,000 of his troops. After eleven days of hard riding, Het'um arrived at a location near Cairo called Doli (which I cannot identify). Throughout the pursuit, the sultan was but 10-12 miles ahead of the king. The latter soon withdrew from Doli because he was afraid of being captured. On his return, Het'um entered Jerusalem and gathered all the Christians from the city who had hitherto hidden in caves. During the 15 days he spent in Jerusalem, Het'um performed magnificent Christian ceremonies and also received a patent from Ghazan granting him the city and its surroundings. Afterwards, Het'um left Jerusalem and rejoined Ghazan in Damascus, spending the rest of the winter with him. Even the editor of this work, Edouard Dulaurier, unequivocally denies the veracity of the account and writes that the author's purpose was to glorify King Het'um. There is little resemblance between the facts described here and the Mamluk works or even the account of the historian Het'um, who certainly cannot be accused of lacking a desire to eulogize the Armenian king. It is quite improbable that the Mamluk writers would have missed an opportunity to attack [the muslim] Ghazan for such a despicable action, i.e., abandoning Muslim territory, especially Jerusalem to Christian depredations."</ref> However, Edouard Dulaurier actually only mentions that [[Nerses Balients]] may have added a few fantastic details to exagerate Hetoum's accomplishments somewhat, specifically disputing that Hetoum went as far as [[Cairo]] when Ghazan himself sent 15,000 men only as far as [[Gaza]], but he does not otherwise challenge the account of the Mongol's capture of Jerusalem and Hetoum's visit to the Holy City for 15 days afterwards.<ref>Receuil des Historiens des Croisades, Historiens Armeniens I, Chronique du Royaume de Petite Armenie, p. 659-660 [http://visualiseur.bnf.fr/CadresFenetre?O=NUMM-51557&M=imageseule Page 659, note 1]:<br>"The account of the battle of Homs, in which [[Ghazan]] routs the Egyptians, on December 23, 1299, can be compared with that of Hayton, ''De Tartare'', cap. XLII, and the narration of M. d'Ohsson, ''Hist. des Mongols'', liv. VI, Chap. vi, t. IV, p.233-240. It is obvious that Nerses Balients added here a few fantastic details, devised to enhance the role played by the king of Armenia Hetoum II, as an auxiliary of the Tartars. We can very certainly put in doubt the pursuing of the Egyptians by this prince, after the battle, as far as the place named Doli by the compiler, which he located near [[Cairo]]. Indeed, the Mongol general who had been dispatched with a body of 15,000 men to pursue Sultan Nacer, did not go farther than [[Gaza]], and stopped at the desert limit between Syria and Egypt". End of the note.</ref>
Return to
Franco-Mongol alliance
.
Views
Page
Discussion
View source
History
Personal tools
Log in
Navigation
Main page
Community portal
Current events
Recent changes
Random page
Help
Search
Toolbox
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
MOOCOW
Google AdSense