Search

This study examines the participation of Cilician Armenians in the Mongol Ilkhanate's Syrian invasions in 1259–1260. Drawing upon data from mediaeval sources and various perspectives in scholarly literature, this paper addresses the following key questions: 1. Where were the troops of the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia and their allied countries consolidated? 2. To what extent did the troops of the Armenian King Het'um I join forces with the Mongols? The inquiry also presents the specific details of the capture of Syrian cities and explores the likelihood of Armenian troops' involvement in these operations. In the final section, the paper delves into the events surrounding the famous Battle of Ain-Jalut and examines the potential participation of Armenians in this pivotal conflict, in which the allies suffered defeat and were subsequently compelled to retreat. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Mediterranea - Ricerche Storiche is the property of Mediterranea-Ricerche Storiche and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Adalya is the property of Koc University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper argues that the unusual determinative MANUS+MANUS of the goddess Pahalati in Hama that resisted explanation until now can be understood due to its new attestation in the logographic spelling of a Cilician toponym. It will be shown that an earlier attempt that identified MANUS+MANUS as a variant of MAGNUS, the city as Urušša, and the name of the goddess as a Phoenician-Luwian mixed phrase meaning 'Great Lady', is palaeographically, linguistically, and geographically impossible. A clue to the decipherment of MANUS+MANUS is provided by the homo(io)phonous settlement in Cilicia, Pahra-, which explains how the same sign could have been used both as a determinative and as a logogram in accordance with the regular rules of the usage of the determinatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Jean d'Arras's romance Mélusine (1393) has been referred to as a "Founding Fiction" of medieval France. Around 1500 it was translated into English. Focusing on the Cilician Armenian episode, this paper finds that the colonizing imperative of d'Arras's text is resisted in the English translation. A comparison of the two versions reveals that the love relation depicted as seamless in d'Arras's version is fractured in the English translation, destabilizing the hegemonic identities of the chivalric hero and courtly heroine. The failure of the love relation and the sacrifice of the courtly heroine in the English text can be read as resistance to the sanitization of Lusignan ascendancy and the imagined community of a unified Christian/Lusignan world that d'Arras's text presents. Reading the relationship crisis through the lenses of Monique Scheer's practice theory of emotions, and Luce Irigaray's and Homi Bhabha's theorizations of mimicry, this essay argues that the English text invites a comparison with history. In this way the English text makes a space for local Cilician Armenian histories, which d'Arras's version appropriates and instrumentally consumes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Arkhaia Anatolika: The Journal of Anatolian Archaeological Studies is the property of Arkhaia Anatolika and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper aims to show how local civic communities, nominally subject to the Seleucid dynasts, integrated Roman magistrates into an existing framework of authority during the late second and early first centuries BCE. I argue that as Roman magistrates played an increasingly significant role in the region, cities initially framed them in quasi-regal terms, which their interlocutors consciously accepted. Through a close reading of two Roman letters to the Cilician city of Mopsuestia, dated to 87 BCE (SEG 44.1227), and analysis of literary, epigraphic, and numismatic evidence for the final collapse of Seleucid authority in the early 60s BCE, I reveal that this was a locally driven process. Consequently, local agents played a critical role in both legitimising Roman hegemony in local contexts and encouraging Roman intervention within the region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Arkeoloji Dergisi is the property of Ege University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Nersēs of Lambron (d. 1198) was a prolific Armenian writer whose works contain several colophons, of which five have a bearing on the Third Crusade. While some colophons serve as prefaces to his writings, others are addenda on circumstances at the time of writing or on later events. The scant history of scholarship devoted to them reveals an unwarranted assumption that has led early scholars to conclude that Nersēs was in Jerusalem when the city fell to Saladin in 1187. The article focuses on the five colophons in chronological order, offering a literary-historical analysis. The colophons composed in quatrains are of particular interest, as are others where a continuator's hand is discernible—whether on the piety of Benedictine monks in the Holy City or on naval movements around Acre. While the study disproves the assumption that Nersēs was in Jerusalem then (or at any time), it underscores the historical significance of these colophons in reflecting Armeno-Cilician sentiments during the period—such as toward the apparently unsatisfactory outcome of the battle of Arsuf (1191). Subsequent hopes of victory and the eventual redemption of Jerusalem were hence anchored in the nascent kingdom of Cilician Armenia (1199–1375). The conclusion draws attention to the absolute necessity of scrutinizing 'eyewitness' accounts surrounding the crusades and to the need of reading the rest of Nersēs's colophons critically. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of CEDRUS is the property of Mediterranean Civilisations Research Institute and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Arkhaia Anatolika: The Journal of Anatolian Archaeological Studies is the property of Arkhaia Anatolika and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Arkeoloji Dergisi is the property of Ege University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of CEDRUS is the property of Mediterranean Civilisations Research Institute and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)