Michael the Syrian ܡܝܟܐܝܠ ܣܘܪܝܝܐ | |
|---|---|
| 79th Patriarch of theUniversal Syriac Orthodox Church | |
 A portrait and icon of Michael the Great | |
| Native name | ܡܝܟܐܝܠ Mikhoēl |
| Church | Syriac Orthodox Church |
| See | Antioch |
| In office | 1166–1199 |
| Predecessor | Athanasius VII bar Qatra |
| Successor | Athanasius VIII |
| Orders | |
| Ordination | 18 October 1166 |
| Personal details | |
| Born | 1126 |
| Died | 1199 (aged 72–73) |
| Buried | Mor Bar Sauma Monastery |
Michael the Syrian, also known asMichael the Great (Syriac:ܡܝܟܐܝܠ ܪܒܐ,romanized: Mīkā'ēl Rabā; 1126–7 November 1199), was theSyriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch from 1166 until his death in 1199. He is widely regarded as one of the most important figures in the history of theSyriac Orthodox Church, remembered both as a saint and as a historian.
Hailing from the distinguished Qindisi family ofMelitene, he quickly rose through the ranks to becomePatriarch of Antioch. His tenure as patriarch at theMor Hananyo Monastery involved maintaining good political and ecumenical relations withCrusaders, expressing disdain forByzantines, and protecting his flock fromArab andTurkic incursions while navigating various church politics, including a schism in the patriarchate byTheodoros bar Wahbun.
His monumentalChronicle is the largest survivingSyriac historical work, covering world history fromCreation up to his own day. The chronicle, mainly preserved in an Edessan manuscript as a copy of a copy, records ecclesiastical affairs, natural phenomena, secular history, and other pertinent matters. Modern scholars call it "undoubtedly the greatest of allSyriac chronicles" and a cornerstone of medieval historiography, in addition to dozens of other works by Michael which catalyzed the era of "Syriac Renaissance."
Michael, described as "one of the greatest pontiffs [...] finest of the Patriarchs [...] of everlasting name, of graceful pursuit, and of uncommon qualities," is highly venerated in theOriental Orthodox Communion and his feast day in theSyriac Orthodox Church is on November 7, the date of his repose.
The life of Michael is recorded byBar Hebraeus. Michael was born inMelitene (modernMalatya, Turkey) into aSyriac Orthodox priestly family. His father, Reverend Eliya al-Qindasi (Elias Qîndîsî), was a priest, and his uncle Athanasius Zakkai (or Zakka) was a monk who later became bishop ofAnazarbus inCilicia in 1136. He thus belonged to the distinguished Qindasi family.[1][2] At the time of his birth, Melitene was part of theTurkoman Danishmend dynasty, and after its division in 1142, it became the capital of a principality. In 1178, the city came under the control of theSultanate of Rûm.
As a youth, Michael joined theMonastery of Mar Barsauma near Melitene, which had served as the patriarchal seat of the Syriac Orthodox Church since the 11th century. After completing his theological studies, he was ordained as amonk. Before reaching the age of thirty, he was appointedarchimandrite (abbot) of the monastery, a position he held for nearly a decade. During this tenure, Michael enlarged the monastery's library, added new buildings, and rebuilt the water supply system, ensuring that it could accommodate the thousands of pilgrims who gathered annually for the feast ofSaint Barsauma.[2] He also took measures to improve the monastery's defenses against marauding bandits.[3]
Michael soon gained a reputation as both a historian and theologian. In 1165,Patriarch Athanasius VII (1139–1166) sought to ordain him bishop ofAmid (modernDiyarbakir), but Michael declined in order to devote himself to study. Following the patriarch's death in 1166, the Holy Synod met at Dayr Fesqin (or Peshqîn) near Melitene to elect his successor. After much debate, Michael was proposed as one of three candidates. Though initially reluctant, he accepted on the condition that the synod agree to enforce certain canons aimed at strengthening the church in its time of turmoil.Dionysios Jacob bar Salibi, bishop ofMarash andMabbug, preached in his favor, and Michael was unanimously elected and consecratedPatriarch of Antioch on 18 October 1166, in the presence of 28 bishops.[4]
Michael was the first Syriac Orthodox patriarch to act within the city ofAntioch itself since the expulsion ofSeverus of Antioch byJustinian in the 6th century, and he consecrated a number of bishops there.[5] He established his primary patriarchal residence at the Monastery ofDeyruelzafaran inMardin, while also spending significant time atMar Barsauma.[6] Immediately after his election, he contactedPope John I of Alexandria (Yohanna ibn Abi Ghalib), in keeping with the traditional bonds between theSyriac andCoptic patriarchates. Michael also traveled extensively through theLevant. In 1168 he made a pilgrimage toJerusalem, staying at the Monastery ofMary Magdalene near theDamascus Gate (Bāb al-'Amūd), and subsequently resided for a year atAntioch, which was underCrusader rule. In Antioch and Jerusalem, he was received with great respect by the Latin patriarchs and nobility, cultivating cordial relations with figures such asAmaury de Nesle, theLatin patriarch of Jerusalem.[7][8]
Michael was invited in 1178 to attend theThird Lateran Council inRome byPope Alexander III but he declined, though he sent a theological treatise in his stead.[9] He likewise refused overtures from Byzantine EmperorManuel I Komnenos, who attempted to negotiate ecclesiastical union. On three occasions (1170, 1172, and thereafter), Michael declined to travel toConstantinople or meet imperial envoys, instead sending representatives and responding with clear affirmations of the Syriac OrthodoxMiaphysite faith.[10]
As patriarch, Michael appointed twenty-five bishops, reformed lax clerical practices, and combatedsimony. His reforms provoked opposition, and he faced several rebellions from bishops and clergy. In 1171 and again in 1176, monks of Mar Barsauma rebelled against him. In 1174, he deposed Yuhanna al-Qaluniqi, bishop ofMardin, who retaliated by agitating theemir of Mosul and ruler of Mardin against Michael. Further opposition came from Bar Masih and culminated in the consecration ofTheodore bar Wahbun as antipatriarch inCilicia around 1180. Supported by discontented clergy, theArmenian king, theCatholicos of Armenia, and even at times theCrusaders — all of whom claimed jurisdictions over theSyrians of Cilicia — Theodore appealed in vain toSaladin for recognition. Michael excommunicated him, and after his escape from imprisonment at Mar Barsauma, Theodore sought refuge with the Armenian catholicosGregory IV andPrince Leo II of Cilician Armenia, who officially recognized him. The schism persisted for 13 years until Theodore's death in 1193, when the Syriac Orthodox synod reaffirmed loyalty to Michael.[11][12][5]
Despite these challenges, Michael maintained wide prestige. He cultivated diplomatic relations with Muslim and Christian rulers alike, including SultanKilij Arslan II ofRûm, whom he met cordially at Melitene in 1182. He supportedPope Mark III of Alexandria in the excommunication ofMark ibn Kunbar during the Egyptian controversy on confession.[13] In hisChronicle, Michael lamented the suffering ofMiddle Eastern Christians under Latin occupation, particularly in Jerusalem.[9]
Late in his life, amidst the controversies withTheodore bar Wahbun and the burdens of office, Michael attempted to resign in 1193, but the synod refused his abdication.[11] He continued his patriarchate until his death on 7 November 1199 at theMonastery of Mar Barsauma, aged 72, having served 33 years as patriarch, and was buried in a tomb he had constructed in advance, located north of the altar of the monastery's church.[14] During his patriarchate, Michael ordained oneMaphrian and 54 bishops.[8] His successor wasAthanasius IX (1199–1207), also abbot of Mar Barsauma; a rival claimant,Michael II the Younger, contested him and later became antipatriarch instead of Athanasius and laterJohn XIV.[15]
Michael is best known for the world chronicle that he composed, the longest and richest surviving chronicle in theSyriac language.[16] TheChronicle is the most extensiveSyriac historical work ever written, comprising 21 books from theCreation of the world to his era in1194.[17] It was composed in a unique three-column format: the first column for secular and political history, the second for ecclesiastical affairs, and the third for natural phenomena such asearthquakes,locust swarms, and celestial events.[18][19] Between chapters, Michael inserted chronological tables that synchronized different systems of dating — theSeleucid era, theNativity,Olympiads, and theHijra (used exclusively in reference to Muslimcaliphs). A small miscalculation in aligning Seleucid and Nativity dates runs throughout the work.[20] This method built upon the tables ofEusebius of Caesarea, was expanded byJacob of Edessa, and later developed by Michael himself.[21]
This new format of separate columns outlining different historical sections was used by earlier by Syriac Orthodox hierarchs such asJohn of Ephesus,Jacob of Edessa, andDionysius of Tell-Mahre, and later byBar Hebraeus. It was reserved for senior hierarchs which emphasized the important mission that accompanied it.[21]
Michael occasionally devoted all three columns to a single subject when greater detail was needed.[22] After the chronicle ends abruptly, it is followed by six appendices. The first appendix summarizes the kings and patriarchs cited in the text. The second appendix is a treatise on the historical identity of theSyrians, associating them with ancientNear Eastern empires which are theAssyrians,Babylonians, andArameans. When the chronicle was translated into Armenian twice in 1246 and 1247, some aspects were changed to accommodate Armenian interests.[23]
The autograph of Michael the Great'sChronicle is lost. What survives is a much later copy of a copy: it was transcribed in 1598 by Bishop Michael of Urbish, four centuries after the author's death[18] and was itself based on an earlier copy produced byMoses of Mardin.[24] The scribe preserved Michael's style, while correcting errors in the margins — sometimes with remarks such as "This was in the year 1909 of the perfidious and corruptGreeks," echoing Michael's own hostility towardByzantine persecutions against theJacobites.[25] The surviving codex, written in elegant script on roughly 800 largefolios, was preserved in the library ofEdessa, though 19 folios are missing.[26] This Edessene manuscript remained inUrfa until 1924, when the city's Christian population was expelled in the aftermath ofSayfo; it was then moved to theSyriac Orthodox church of St. George inAleppo. TheHill Museum and Manuscript Library digitized it in 2008.[27]
The 1598 Urbish copy remains the only extant Syriac witness of the text, written inSerto script,[25] although other transcriptions based on it exist. The manuscript was discovered in Edessa and subsequently copied for modern scholars. One such copy was made for theSyriac Catholic PatriarchIgnatius Ephrem Rahmani in 1887, and another for the French orientalistJean-Baptiste Chabot in 1899 (a digital facsimile is available atvHMML Reading Room). TheVorlage for these later copies is preserved today by the Edessene community inAleppo. The text has lacunae, corresponding exactly to the gaps in the Arabic versions made from it. Despite these defects, the 1598 codex is regarded as the best surviving witness to theChronicle's original layout and presentation.[5][28]
An abridged Armenian translation was produced in 1248 by theAssyrian priest Yeshu' (Ishoʿ) ibn Shammas Yaʿqub al‑Tume al‑Sharqi, a native ofHisn Kifa, at the request of CatholicosConstantine I of Cilicia. The work was not a literal translation but a condensed adaptation, often altering the material considerably. It was later revised by the Armenian monk Vardan. Two Jerusalem editions appeared in 1870 and 1871, with the latter considered more reliable.[29][26][30]
This Armenian version was the first form of Michael'sChronicle to reach Europe. It served as the basis for the French translation published in 1868 byVictor Langlois, who mistakenly assumed it was a complete rendering of the Syriac original.[30]
TheChronicle was also translated intoGarshuni (Arabic inSyriac script) by John Shuqayr (Hanna al-Sadadi), metropolitan ofDamascus, in 1759. At least five manuscripts of this translation survive.[17][26] However, since Shuqayr worked directly from the 1598 Urbish copy, the Arabic version preserves the same lacunae as the SyriacVorlage.[31][5]
Other Arabic renderings exist, including a more recent translation provided by the late Archbishop Saliba Shamoun (1932–2025) and edited byGregorios Yohanna Ibrahim.[32]
Knowledge of Michael'sChronicle in Europe began only in the 18th century, and even then it was largely ignored —Joseph Assemani did not reference it despite his access to Syriac sources. The Armenian adaptation initially misled scholars, as it was thought to represent a faithful translation. Serious study began only in the mid-19th century, when manuscripts of the Armenian text reached Europe.[33]
In 1899–1910, J. B. Chabot published a French translation in four volumes (Chronique de Michel le Syrien, Patriarche Jacobite d'Antioche, 1166–1199), based on the Syriac manuscript in Edessa. His work included afacsimile edition of the Syriac text prepared between 1897 and 1899 in Aleppo, though some scribal errors were introduced in the copying process.[17][5]
In 2014, Matti Moosa published the first complete English translation of theChronicle, titledThe Syriac Chronicle of Michael Rabo (the Great).
The first column of theChronicle records wars and conflicts amongArabs (whom Michael always callsṬāyyōyê,[1] in reference toTayy),Turks,Byzantines,Latins (Crusaders), andArmenians.
Michael paid particular attention to theCrusaders. He devoted long passages to theKnights Templar, praising their asceticism, obedience, fraternity, and generosity in famine relief. While theological divisions remained, he considered the Latins more favorable allies thanGreeks, who consistently persecuted theSyriac Orthodox (seeCaesaropapism).[34]
Michael describes the devastating sieges of Edessa in the 12th century, whose population suffered the most at the hands of successive invaders. Caught betweenFranks,Greeks,Turks,Arabs, and their internal conflicts, Edessa was besieged repeatedly, each time producing severe persecution of its defenseless citizens: death, torture, imprisonment, humiliation, starvation, slavery, and rape. Many structures were dismantled for building material or repurposed — for example, the Church of St. Thomas was used as a stable. Michael places great blame on the Franks, whom he sometimes preferred to Turks or Greeks, who routinely pillaged the city and subjugated its nativeMiaphysite population; even when their victory was hoped for during the Turkish occupation, he calls them "brainless fools" for plundering shops and houses instead of attacking the Turkish soldiers in the citadel, which contributed to their defeat. After this disaster, Edessa fell into moral and spiritual decline, with Christians reduced to a minority as mosques multiplied.[35]
After the disaster of 1146, the city declined morally and its nativeSyrian inhabitants were spiritually broken. Christians became a minority while the Muslim population grew and more mosques were built. Edessa was later absorbed by theAyyubids, theMongol conquests ofTatars andHulaguids, and finally theOttoman Empire, and its Christian population was largely eliminated during the persecutions that culminated in the early 20th century. By 1908, Christians constituted only about 19% of the population; on the eve of the mass exodus in 1924, the Syriac Orthodox numbered roughly 2,500. There are no Christians remaining inŞanlıurfa today.[35]
The second column focuses on the church, particularly in ecclesiastical matters, which make up a large section — this was due to how at the time, theSyriac Orthodox Church extended across theLevant,Mesopotamia,Arabia,Iran,India, andChina, and was governed by mutually antagonistic factions. Here, Michael recorded relations with neighboring communities. He chastised the "Synodites" (Chalcedonians/Byzantines) for their persecutions, claiming they devoted more energy to oppressing theSyriac people than resisting Turks. In contrast, relations with theCoptic Church were warm, and regular correspondence between patriarchs was reported.[36]
Michael's theology portrays Christianity as independent of territory or temporal power. Like earlierSyriac chroniclers, a comparison is made toancient Mesopotamian beliefs, where he interprets successes and failures in history as signs of divine favor or abandonment.[37][38]
The third column registers natural events: earthquakes acrossAntioch,Damascus, andConstantinople;locusts; andcomets, which Michael calledkawkbō šūšīnō ("curly star"), preserving Syriac terminology over Greek loanwords. He rebukes astrologers for their attempts to predict events, including times when they failed to do so, affirming instead that disasters came from divine judgment, not planetary influence.[37]
Michael's mastery ofSyriac is noted as advanced and traditional, though he also read and spokeArabic, and commended other bishops for their knowledge. HisChronicle includes occasional Arabisms in colloquial dialect, as well as Syriacized borrowings fromGreek,Armenian, andLatin.[39]
While he rarely mentions sources for some periods — likely drawing on memory and oral traditions — he does name a few: 1.Jacob of Edessa, Michael's main source for the pre-7th century; 2.Dionysius of Tell-Mahre, whose chronicle no longer survives; 3.Basil Bar‑Shumono, whom Michael quoted on early Edessan history; 4.Dionysius bar Salibi, whom Michael called an exceptional writer; 5. PatriarchJohn bar Shushan, whom Michael does not quote directly but reports his work; 6. Joseph the Monk, whom Michael quoted for the invasion ofMiletus in 1050 AD; 7. Ignatius bishop of Melitene, whom Michael quotes at length regarding theSyriac Orthodox faith before theChalcedonian patriarch of Constantinople; and 8. Evenaius of Keshum, whom Michael refutes for claiming that temptation strikes the righteous without the will of God, thereby undermining divine providence. He also quoted lost works, such as the Chronicle ofAzakh, letters, synodal acts, and local biographies. Greek historians, ecclesiastical pamphlets, and unnamed Arabic sources were also used.[40][41][38]
Michael freely insertedbiblical parallels into his historical narrative, a tendency scholars term "presentism." He likened theSyriac Orthodox to theIsraelites, theNestorians toJudas, and theSeljuks toJezebel.Turks were cast asGog and Magog, whileKilij Arslan, Sultan ofIconium, was seen as fulfilling the prophecy inJeremiah 17:5. Biblical portents were linked to earthquakes, eclipses, or comets, read as divine warnings preceding invasions.[42]
Michael attempts to console the believers by drawing on biblical events from the Old Testament. The events of theCouncil of Chalcedon are compared to theevents ofExodus 32, and to the three who remained faithful inPersia when all the captives of Judah worshipped the statue; Michael applies this to the multitude at Chalcedon, calling them the synod of the apostates. He also cites "one who does the will [of God] is better than one thousand" (Eccl. 16:3). A recurring emphasis is that the saved are always a minority, and that the Church's size or prestige does not matter so long as it upholds true doctrine.[43]
His historical outlook emphasized that punishment follows sin, but calamities can be alleviated through repentance. He cited theplague of 745, which abated only when the Arab caliphMarwan II repented.[44]
The general view that developed in Syriachistoriography is that disasters are caused by sin and are sent to punish sin and to teach people not to sin, but that disasters can also be relieved or averted by repentance and eventually by the intervention of the Church and its relics. This included the belief that God sends warning signs of impending disaster for those who have the sense to understand them. Since the schism caused by the Council of Chalcedon, God has sent portents involvingthe sun, earthquakes, and tearful signs in the sky that were taken to indicate the wickedness of the heretics and what would come upon the earth. But the warnings were not heeded, so God sent thebarbarians.[45]
Michael refers to numerous examples in which strange phenomena were taken to be divine messages. In the mid-fifth century, the fall of three stones from the sky was regarded by many as a sign of corruption in the churches, the dislodgment of the Orthodox faith, and the advance ofDyophysite doctrine, while a darkness similar to an eclipse observed at the consecration ofMarcian was signified as a sign marking his reign of spiritual blindness and uproar. WhenJustin I started his reign, a fiery comet shaped like a spear pointing downward was interpreted as a sign of apostasy and the destruction of the Church. When a similar streak fire shaped like a sword stretched across the sky from south to north for thirty days in 634, many took it to be a sign of theadvance of the Arabs. Later, in 745, three pillars of fire were witnessed by contemporaries in the heavens, and in the following year heavy dust darkened the sky for weeks alongside meteors in January and a flame towering in the same direction. All these signs were seen as omens of war, bloodshed, disasters and divine chastisement.[46]
He criticized Byzantine rulers likeHeraclius for mutilating Syriac Orthodox dissenters. Heraclius ordered the noses and ears cut off and houses looted for anyone who did not support the Council of Chalcedon. This persecution persisted for an extended period, and many monks — particularly those fromBeit Maron,Mabbugh,Hims, and the southern regions — supported the council and seized control of numerous churches and monasteries.[47] Michael reports that Christians are unfit to govern other Christians, and despite persecution in theSassanid regions, he regarded it as preferable toRoman rule, which he portrays as intent on destroying both theSyriac Orthodox Church and theChurch of the East by continuously slaughtering theSyriac Christians. He further asserts that the Islamic conquests functioned simultaneously as punishment for the Chalcedonians and as a providential rescue for theMiaphysites, who, he argues, would not have survived without them — despite thesevere hardships the church later suffered under Muslim rule.[48] Michael also recounts that the Orthodox bishop Epiphanius fled theArab conquest of Syria only to be killed as a martyr by the Roman general Gregorius inCilicia.[49] He adds that when the Romans withdrew fromSyria, they robbed, pillaged, and devastated the country more than the Arabs, treating it as if it belonged to an enemy. Michael then remarks, "if the Arabs did not keep their promises, neither did the Romans — and not only toward the Arabs but among themselves."[50]
Michael’s Chronicle articulates both confessional and ethnic identities. Above all, he defined the mhaymne (“the faithful”), meaning Syriac Orthodox believers, whether Syriac- or Arabic-speaking (inMosul andTikrit), as his people, together with theCopts,Armenians, and other communities who shared hisMiaphysite faith.[51]
In his Chronicle, Michael the Syrian states that he belongs to the Aramean race or nation (umṭo), that is, the descendants ofAram who later came to be known as Syrians (Sūryōyē),[52] a name that, according to Michael, the Greeks used for the Arameans. He regardedAramaic as the original and unifying language of the ancient Near East, shared by the kingdoms ofBabylonia,Chaldea,Assyria, and the Arameans, and presented the heritage of these kingdoms as belonging to the Syrians as well, in addition to the Syriac Orthodox Church.[53] In his account, an "empire of our language and our script" had existed until the time ofCyrus the Persian, and the preservation of this language demonstrated the historical continuity of the Syrians.[54][55][56]
Melkites (ethnic Syrians who followed theCouncil of Chalcedon after imperial crackdown) were disparagingly labeled "Greeks" rather than Syrians.[51] Both Byzantine and Muslim critics mocked the Syriac Christians for "never producing kingdoms," to which Michael countered by citing Babylonia, Assyria, and the Aramean kingdoms as their sovereign ancestors.[57][21] Michael raised the question of whether the Syrians should be regarded as Assyrians or Arameans; however, he considered the Assyrians to be descendants of the Arameans.[58]
He uses names like "Assyria" (Ātōr), "Nineveh," and "Babylonia" for Mesopotamian regions not necessarily drawn from the Old Testament but possibly reflecting an awareness of these as ancestral lands, and he explicitly distinguishes Mosul, Nineveh, and Assyria.[59][60] However, in Syriac,Āthor ("Assyria") came to denote the city ofMosul. From this usage, the gentilic adjectiveāthorāyā (Assyrian) was applied to the inhabitants of Mosul. Using the term in this sense, Michael the Syrian referred toImad al-Din Zengi, theatabeg of Mosul, as an “Assyrian (āthorāyā) pig."[61] However, his Chronicle provides no evidence of a 12th-century Assyrian identity. It reflects a geographic orgentilic term rather than a communalethnonym. Michael records no living memory amongMiddle Eastern Christians of biblical Assyria or Chaldea and, citingActs 19:19, suggests that related writings were destroyed. His account indicates that 12th-century Jacobite andNestorian Christians did not regard themselves as Assyrians and would have been terrified by such an association.[62]
Attributed toJacob of Edessa (d. 708), transmitted viaDionysius of Tell-Mahre (d. 945), and later adopted by Michael, the Syriac account reframes ancient history to claim powerful "Syrian" kingdoms east and west of theEuphrates. Michael emphasized the historical significance of the "Syrian" kingdoms that existed on both sides of theEuphrates, using this narrative to assert his people's historical sovereignty despite lacking contemporary kings. He portrayed the Seleucids as local Syrian kings, viewing them as restorers of native royalty afterAlexander's conquest of Persia. Despite Alexander being Greek, he was considered native, contributing to a hybrid Syrian identity characterized byAramaic language andGreek cultural influences.[63]
Until the rediscovery of theChronicle, Michael the Great was primarily known in the West as an author of canonical and liturgical writings. The publication of his universal history dramatically shifted scholarly appreciation of his importance. His work extends fromCreation to his own day (late 12th century), and is based on a wide array of sources, many of which are now lost.[17]
These include Syriac chronicles such as those ofJacob of Edessa,John of Litharb,Dionysius of Tell-Mahre, as well as non-Orthodox Syriac authors likeElias of Nisibis andTheophilus of Edessa. Michael also cites local chronicles, council records, biographies, theological pamphlets, and Greek historians, alongside letters and official reports. He drew heavily onJohn of Asia for the period ofEmperor Tiberius III.[64]
Medieval and modern scholars alike have hailed Michael's work as "undoubtedly the greatest of all Syriac chronicles.[65] It preserves priceless excerpts from otherwise lost Syriac historians, including Dionysius of Tell-Mahre. Scholars emphasize that Michael's historiographical method was consistent with medieval practice but rooted in the strong tradition ofSyriac Christian historical writing, which shaped the historiography of theSyriac Orthodox Church, culminating inBar Hebraeus (1226–1286), who drew extensively on Michael.[66]
AlthoughMoses of Mardin collaborated with European scholars in the 16th century, the Chronicle itself remained unknown in Europe until the Armenian version circulated in the 19th century.Joseph Assemani ignored it, and it was only throughChabot's edition that it entered mainstream Oriental studies.[33] Today, the Chronicle remains a central source for the history of Byzantium, Islam, Crusades, and the medievalNear East, in addition to its role in preservingSyriac identity.
As Michael began to write more personally in the final parts of his Chronicle, compassion and sensitivity became visible: sadness at death by violence and war and sympathy for living beings in pain were prevalent elements of his later writings.[67]
| Part of a series on |
| Oriental Orthodoxy |
|---|
 |
| Oriental Orthodox churches |
Independent churches |
History and theology
|
Liturgy and practices
|
Major figures
|
Links and resources |
 Christianity portal |
Although best remembered for his monumentalChronicle, Michael the Great was also an active theologian, liturgist, and ecclesiastical legislator. His surviving and attributed writings demonstrate the breadth of his intellectual, pastoral, and historical activity within theSyriac Orthodox Church.[68][69]
Michael the Great | |
|---|---|
| Mor Michael Rabo | |
| Born | Michael ܡܝܟܐܝܠ |
| Resting place | Mor Bar Sauma Monastery |
| Honored in | Oriental Orthodox Churches, especiallySyriac Orthodox Church |
| Feast | November 7 |
Tradition or genre | Syriac Christianity |
Michael the Great is one of the most highly venerated saints in theOriental Orthodox communion, especially within theSyriac Orthodox Church, where he is remembered for his scholarship, sanctity, and wisdom. His feast is celebrated on November 7, the anniversary of his repose in 1199.[71]
The late patriarchIgnatius Aphrem I Barsoum (1887-1957) of theSyriac Orthodox Church describes him as "one of the greatest pontiffs of the Church of God, the finest of the Patriarchs of Antioch, a scholar, and a famous chronicler; of everlasting name, of graceful pursuit, and of uncommon qualities, of widely known virtues, and of good deeds." He continues: "Is it not right for the general history of the world to remember your honorable name since you have written those volumes that are full of the events of the ages, from their inception until your happy reign, for you have brought to life what took place, and had it not been for you, these would have been totally forgotten? Indeed, it is befitting to do so for the world in general and for your nation in particular. Your greatness is manifest not only in this, but also in the fact that you were magnificent in your virtues, endurance and self-esteem. You were great in your Patriarchal works. It is no wonder that history describes you as the 'Great.'"[8]
On the 800th anniversary of Michael's passing, theSyriac Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch declared 1999 the "Year of Saint Michael the Great." A solemnDivine Liturgy was celebrated in honor of Mor Michael Rabo at St. Ephrem's Monastery in Ma'arratSaydnaya. Although a symposium of scholars and orientalists had been planned forAleppo, it was ultimately convened at the Patriarchal Theological Seminary at St. Ephrem's Monastery in Saydnaya from October 1 to 8, 1999.[8]
Michael'sChronicle is regarded as the most voluminous historical work in the Syriac Orthodox tradition, foundational to later historiography.[72]Sebastian Brock describes it as "undoubtedly the greatest of all Syriac chronicles."[65] His era catalyzed what scholars call the "Syriac Renaissance," a period of cultural and theological revival within the Syriac Orthodox Church.[73]
Michael is further remembered as a poet, canonist, and defender of the faith, whose example continues to inspire Syriac Orthodox faithful to "hold to the faith, work according to the law of the Lord, persist in it day and night, and comply with the Canon of the Church… that it may keep us within the fold of Christ Jesus, our Lord."[8]
Following theAssyrian genocide, theSyriac Orthodox Patriarchal See was forcibly relocated fromMardin, Turkey, in 1924, after theestablishment of the Turkish Republic. This patriarchal seat had been established by Michael in 1166 and remained in Mardin until that time, marking the first change in nearly a millennium.[5] It was relocated toHoms,Syria and later toDamascus, where it remains today as theSyriac Orthodox Patriarchal Archdiocese of Damascus.[74]
Since at least the ninth century, West and East Syriac ecclesiastical elites have taken disparate and shifting positions on how to translate the term "Suryoyo" into other languages. Suryoyo, in these ancient texts, referred to both the Syriac language and the Roman province of Syria and was linked by medieval ecclesiastical historians to both the ancient Aramaeans and the ancient Assyrians. Patriarch Michael the Great, for example, wrote in his twelfth-century ecclesiastical history that both the ancient Assyrians and the ancient Aramaeans were forebears of the Syriac tradition because there were Aramaic speakers in both societies.
Timestamp; 1:12:24 - 1:12:42
It is undoubtedly to the scholar Jacob of Edessa (d. 708), transmitted to the Syrian — Orthodox historian and patriarch Dionysius of Tellmahre (d. 945), himself taken up by another Syrian Orthodox patriarch and historian, Michael the Syrian (d. 1199), that we owe the Syriac version of the history of the ancient kingdoms, centered on the idea that there were powerful "Syrian" kingdoms east and west of the Euphrates. The authorities of the Syriac Orthodox Church wanted to show that they had sovereigns of their own even though in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages they no longer had their own kings to represent them. This passage is written against the (Byzantine) Greeks and has an apologetic dimension aimed at defending the Syriacs by showing the importance of the kingdoms that emerged from them.. he rereads world history through this prism and situates Alexander between the kingdoms he calls "Syrian" of the Chaldeans and Assyrians ("Syrian" because they all used Aramaic, like the Suryoye, Syrian or Syriac), which existed until Cyrus the Great conquered them… This reading of history, which aims to show "that empires arose from our people more powerful than all the empires of their time," places Alexander as the restorer of a "Syrian" power since he put an end to the kingdom of the Persians which had triumphed over the "Syrian" Mesopotamian empires…
{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help){{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help){{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)| Preceded by | Syriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch 1166–1199 | Succeeded by |
of theChurch of Antioch before 518 | |
| |
| Homoian group |
|
| Meletian group | |
| Eustathian group |
|
| Apollonarist group |
|
| |
