Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Μ. Ασία

1. Historical context

The period between 1071 and 1081, when the establishment of Philaretos Brachamios’ rule takes place (he was domestikos ton Scholon of the East and kouropalates¹during the reign of Romanos IV Diogenes) marks the beginning of the end for Byzantine rule over Asia Minor. Following the defeat of Romanos IV (1068-1071) at the battle of Manzikert, in 1071, the Byzantine rule in Asia Minor crumbled, paving the way for the onslaught of the Seljuk Turks into these lands. The situation was compounded by the civil war between Michael VII Doukas (1071-1078) and Romanos IV, when the latter tried to reclaim the throne he had lost when he was captive of the sultan Alp Arslan. The civil war divided the troops of the East, as some sided with Diogenes and others opposed him, in a period when enemy pressure in the border areas is mounting.

Preoccupied with dealing with Romanos, the government at Constantinople.was incapable of reacting to the intensifying Seljuk infiltration in the region. The arrest and blinding of Romanos offered Arp Arslan an opportunity to declare the peace treaty he had signed with him after the battle of Manzikert null, resulting in the commencement of massive Seljuk invasions into Asia Minor. This chaotic situation was complemented by a series of military uprisings, the leaders of which aimed at capturing the throne or securing the political autonomy of the areas under their control. The Armenians as well as the Norman mercenaries in the emperor's service tried to carve out independent states in the chaos that ensued. The limitrophe populations, disenchanted because the central administration had left them without military protection and had repeatedly pressured various groups² into embracing the Orthodox dogma, had neither the strength nor the willingness to protect the shadowy imperial rule in the area. Philaretos Brachamios rebelled in Cilicia, where the strong presence of the Armenian element³ aided the success of his plans.

2. Philaretos Brachamios' activity, 1072-1077

After the death of Romanos IV, Philaretos Brachamios, wishing to establish his own rule in the area of Cilicia, refused to recognize the authority of Emperor Michael VII Doukas, and begun acting independently. In this he was significantly aided by the local population, who saw in him the commander of an organized army capable of offering effective protection against the Seljuk attacks, when Constantinople had almost abandoned them. In 1072-1073 he strengthened his position in Mesopotamia, attacking the Armenian princes who held these lands, at first with the aid of the Franks under Raimbaud and then with the cooperation of the Turkmen;⁴ afterwards, he started making his way to the mountainous regions of the Taurus.⁵ Brachamios commanded troops of various ethnic backgrounds: the majority were Armenians, but his forces included Frankish mercenary troops under the command of Raimbaud, as well as remnants of Byzantine troops entrusted to him in the past by Romanos. At any rate, he had the ability to recruit troops, insofar as he could afford their payment with the money originating from the taxation he imposed on the cities under his rule. Apparently in around 1074 his successes were enough for the imperial government to issue orders to the doukes.of Antioch.and Melitene.to take action against him.

The rebellion broke out in Antioch in 1075, when the city’s doukas Isaac Komnenos arrested and deposed Patriarch Aimilianos, the leader of the anti-government camp, enjoying the support of Philaretos Brachamios who aspired to place this important city under his control. Isaac Komnenos, however, managed to restore order and Brachamios turned to Edessa, which he captured in 1077 with the help of Basil Apokapes, former doukas of Edessa.

3. Capture of Antioch and end of the rebellion

Isaac Komnenos left Antioch in the first half of 1078 to return to Constantinople, at the behest of the new emperor Nikephoros III Botaneiates.(1078-1081). In his place he left the Armenian prince Vasak Pahlawuni, an enemy of Philaretos and a person capable of defending the city against his expansionist plans. Vasak was murdered by ‘Romans’⁶ late in 1078. The resulting power vacuum forced his troops to invite Philaretos to Antioch, thus fulfilling the wishes of a large portion of the citizens who supported the anti-government camp, the leader of which was the now exiled in Constantinople Patriarch Aimilianos. Philaretos took advantage of this opportunity and hastened to take power into his hands. He immediately punished the persons responsible for the murder. Using a military operation as a pretext, he rounded the ‘apostate Romans’ into a nearby village and ordered his troops to execute them. Almost at the same time, Nikephoros III Botaneiates evinced a willingness to formally recognize Brachamios’ rule in southeast Asia Minor, provided that he in turn would recognize his ascent to the throne of Constantinople as legitimate. Late in 1078 his realm extended from Tarsus in Cilicia to Harput of Armenia in the north –including the mountainous areas above the Pyramos River and Germanikeia (Marash) of Syria- and from Antioch to Mesopotamia in the east, including the city of Edessa.

4. Consequences

The rebellion of Philaretos Brachamios resulted in the creation of a state entity of considerable size, later known as Lesser Armenia.or Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia, which extended from the region of Cilicia and reached as far as Samosata by the Euphrates. This meant that the plans of the rebel were fulfilled: with his authority recognized by Nikephoros III Botaneiates, he regained legitimacy without making any concessions; while he was formally a vassal ruler of the Byzantine Empire, he actually remained fully independent.

Philaretos Brachamios had captured regions, the majority of which had returned to the possession of the Byzantine Empire recently, after many years under Arab rule, and were constantly threatened by the Seljuk Turks and the Turkmen. The empire at that period was incapable of defending them against these threats. Insofar as Brachamios managed to secure the freedom of their inhabitants, he was viewed as a protector of the empire against the raids, a person who checked the advance of heathen enemies into its lands. The recognition of Brachamios’ independence, however, marked the permanent loss of these lands for the Byzantines. With them Antioch was taken too, a loss that would once more deprive the empire of its most important foothold in southeast Asia Minor.

Brachamios’ defection from the Byzantine army and the creation of his realm contributed to the loss of significant regions and the dissolution of Byzantine rule there. In the long term this event accelerated the weakening of Byzantine rule in the wider region of Asia Minor, increasing the isolation from Constantinople of those areas bordering with Brachamios’s dominion and hampering the access of Byzantine officials to them.

1. According to Cheynet (see Cheynet, J.C. — Vannier, J.F., Etudes prosopographiques [Byzantina Sorbonensia 5, Paris 1986], p. 68), Brachamios held the title of kouropalates already under Romanos IV. Other scholars believe that he received the title following negotiations with Nikephoros Botaneiates; see Laurent, J., "Byzance et Antioche sous le couropalate Philarete", Revue des etudes Armeniennes 9 (1929), p. 155, Vryonis, S. Jr., The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of Islamisation from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London 1986), (trans.) Κ. Γαλαταριώτου, Η παρακμή του μεσαιωνικού Ελληνισμού της Μικράς Ασίας και η διαδικασία του εξισλαμισμού (11ος έως 15ος αι.) (Αθήνα 1996), p. 99, and Charanis, P., "The Armenians in the Byzantine Empire", Byzantinoslavica 22 (1961), p. 236.

2. The government of Constantinople had repeatedly attempted during the 11^th century to impose the Orthodox creed to the Syrians and Armenians, thus causing the disgruntlement and estrangement of these populations.

3. The advance of the Seljuk Turks to the west intensified the moving of Armenians further into the empire, which had already begun in the 10^th century. The Armenian element was particularly numerous in the regions of Cilicia and northern Syria. See Vryonis, S. Jr., The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of Islamisation from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London 1986), (trans.) Κ. Γαλαταριώτου, Η παρακμή του μεσαιωνικού Ελληνισμού της Μικράς Ασίας και η διαδικασία του εξισλαμισμού (11ος έως 15ος αι.) (Αθήνα 1996), pp. 48-49.

4. One of the Armenian princes was Tornik, a general of Sassoun. Michael VII Doukas, in order to effectively deal with Philaretos, invested the Armenian princes with new administrative powers. See Cheynet, J.C., Pouvoir et Contestations a Byzance (963-1210) (Byzantina Sorbonensia 9, Paris 1990), p. 398.

5. Using fortresses in the Taurus area as staging grounds, Brachamios managed to capture cities cut off from the empire's main body due to the Seljuk raids, while he also succeeded in keeping the Seljuk Turks away from the lands under his control.

6. This testimony originates from the chronicler Matthew of Edessa, Armenia and the Crusades, Tenth to eleventh Century: The Chronicle of Matthew of Edessa, A.E. Dostourian (ed.) (Armenian Heritage Series, Lanham, New York, London 1993), p. 141, who uses the term ‘Romans’ when referring to the Byzantines.