Papers by Konstantinos Takirtakoglou
Medieval Encounters 29.4, 2023
The present paper discusses the reign of the Rubenid lord of Armenian Cilicia, Mleh (1170–1175), ... more The present paper discusses the reign of the Rubenid lord of Armenian Cilicia, Mleh (1170–1175), and examines his relations with the two great powers of the period, the Byzantine Empire and the Zengids under Nūr al-Dīn (1146–1174). Through examination of the contemporary sources of the period, the following conclusions may be drawn: Firstly, Manuel (1143–1180) did not send an expeditionary force against Mleh. On the contrary, Mleh faced and defeated the local Byzantine garrisons. Secondly, the Crusaders waged a campaign against Mleh in 1173, which was partially successful as it forced the Rubenid lord to recognize the suzerainty of the king of Jerusalem, albeit temporarily. Thirdly, a consequence of the Crusader success was the Byzantine re-conquest of the cities of the Cilician Plain. Finally, Mleh’s status as a client of Nur al-Din does not relate to his religious identity. The sources make it clear that he remained a Christian.
Banber Matenadarani 32, 2021
The present study examines the alliance between the Bagratid king Ashot II and the Byzantines. It... more The present study examines the alliance between the Bagratid king Ashot II and the Byzantines. It must be noted that the empire played a crucial role in the stabilization of Ashot II’s hold on power in the chaotic aftermath of his father Smbat’s murder. Thanks to imperial influence, the Bagratid prince was able to rally his allies to his side. The sources indicate that Byzantine diplomacy, pursuing the formation of a pan-Christian anti-Arab coalition, pressured the lords of the Caucasus to support Ashot. The second issue examined in the present study is the supposed end of the alliance, which according to certain historians was terminated when Ashot improved his relations with the Arabs. This assertion is lent credence by the account of StepꜤanos TarōnecꜤi regarding the Byzantine siege of Dvin, according to which it was defended by Yūsuf Sājid’s lieutenant, Subuk, together with Ashot II (922). However, certain facts cast doubt on the credibility of this account. To understand what lies behind TarōnecꜤi’s account, we must examine the Byzantine and Arab sources. According to these, the Byzantines campaigned against Dvin in 928, not 922, as it was not until this period that they finally managed to deal with the Bulgarian threat and could afford to turn their attention to the East. It was during precisely this period that Ashot II, after the death of Yūsuf Sājid, had begun the process of re-conquering the final Sājid-controlled territories in Armenia. In light of these strategic conditions, the Byzantine operations against Dvin and north of Lake Van were in support of Ashot, not against him. In short, John Kourkouas’ appearance outside of Dvin demonstrates that the Armenian-Byzantine alliance remained in place throughout Ashot’s rule.
Byzantinische Zeitschrift 114(3), 2021
The present paper challenges the assertion that John II Komnenos’ first campaign against Cilician... more The present paper challenges the assertion that John II Komnenos’ first campaign against Cilician Armenia (1137) was directly connected with the conflict between the Byzantines and the Principality of Antioch. The supposed anti-Byzantine alliance between the Armenians and the Crusaders is examined within this context; excerpts from the relevant sources not only cast doubt on its existence, but also allow the assertion that during the period under examination the relations between the Armenians and the Crusaders were hostile. Thus, the issue that arises is the following: If Levon was an enemy of the Crusaders, why did he not stand at the Byzantines’ side, instead waging war against them? The assertion of the present paper regarding this policy decision is that it was due to Levon’s alliance with John’s primary enemy in the East, the Danishmends. In fact, the sources indicate that the subjugation of Armenia was of greater priority for the Byzantine emperor in his campaign than the conquest of Antioch. This is demonstrated by the fact that John refused to conclude a treaty with the Rubenid lord similar to that which he had concluded with the prince of Antioch, and is supported by the operational maneuvers of the Byzantine forces during the campaign. To connect John’s activities in Cilicia with his subsequent campaign in Pontus and the Turkish reactions to these Byzantine strategic moves, the present paper asserts that John’s conquest of Cilicia was part of a wider policy of strategic encirclement of the Danishmends.
Journal of Medieval Military History 19, 2021
Byzantina Symmeikta 28, 2018
Αim of this study is to examine why the presence of select Turkic warriors
in the Abbasid armies ... more Αim of this study is to examine why the presence of select Turkic warriors
in the Abbasid armies had little impact on the course of the Arab-Byzantine
conflicts. The article focuses mainly on the campaigns conducted by the
commander Bughā al-Kabīr against the Byzantine Empire and other
Caliphate enemies.
Byzantina Symmeikta 25, 2015
This article attempts to present the conflicts between the Byzantines and the Arabs, in the perio... more This article attempts to present the conflicts between the Byzantines and the Arabs, in the period that Nicephorus Phocas was active on the eastern front. It aims to fill certain gaps in the history of this period in the light of medieval Arabic sources.
Arab historiographers and geographers recount the deeds of Nicephorus Phocas, both as Domestic and as Emperor, informing us of how the Islamic world reacted to Byzantium's renewed aggressiveness.
Except for the military sector, historians can benefit from the information provided by the Arabic sources regarding internal affairs of the Byzantien Empire, such as the bad relations of Nicephorus Phocas with the circle of Emperor Romanos II or the active role of the Armenians in the wars of that period.
This study focuses also on all the conflicts of Nicephorus Phocas, both with the Hamdanids and with the Arabs of Sicily, but allso on the campaigns against Crete and Cyprus. Particular attention is given to the demeanor of the Byzantine Emperor in these operations, as seen by the Arabic sources.
Byzantiaka 31, 2014
The purpose of this article is to study whether the conflicts between Byzantines and Arabs at the... more The purpose of this article is to study whether the conflicts between Byzantines and Arabs at the time of Nikephoros II Phokas (963-969) can be determined and considered as a part of the Byzantine holy war. More specifically, this article will examine all information – evidences of the Byzantine and Arab sources – revealing the strong presence of the religious
fanaticism contained in these conflicts
Book Section by Konstantinos Takirtakoglou
War in Eleventh-Century Byzantium. Ed: G. Theotokis and M. Meško. Routledge, 2020
Books by Konstantinos Takirtakoglou
Book Reviews by Konstantinos Takirtakoglou
Βυζαντιακά 35 (2018-2019)
Talks by Konstantinos Takirtakoglou
24th International Congress of Byzantine Sudies. Byzantium- Bridge Between Wordls. Venice-Padua, 22-27 August 2022
Second International Conference on the Military History of the Mediterranean Sea, Thessaloniki, 16-18 September , 2021
Conference on Armenological and Oriental Studies Dedicated to the 100th Anniversary of Prof. Hakob Papazian, Matenadaran Mesrop Mashtots Institute, Erevan, 1-3 July, 2021
2nd International Conference on Byzantine Studies and Eastern Middle Ages, Federal University of São Paulo, 23-25 March, 2021
Uploads
Papers by Konstantinos Takirtakoglou
in the Abbasid armies had little impact on the course of the Arab-Byzantine
conflicts. The article focuses mainly on the campaigns conducted by the
commander Bughā al-Kabīr against the Byzantine Empire and other
Caliphate enemies.
Arab historiographers and geographers recount the deeds of Nicephorus Phocas, both as Domestic and as Emperor, informing us of how the Islamic world reacted to Byzantium's renewed aggressiveness.
Except for the military sector, historians can benefit from the information provided by the Arabic sources regarding internal affairs of the Byzantien Empire, such as the bad relations of Nicephorus Phocas with the circle of Emperor Romanos II or the active role of the Armenians in the wars of that period.
This study focuses also on all the conflicts of Nicephorus Phocas, both with the Hamdanids and with the Arabs of Sicily, but allso on the campaigns against Crete and Cyprus. Particular attention is given to the demeanor of the Byzantine Emperor in these operations, as seen by the Arabic sources.
fanaticism contained in these conflicts
Book Section by Konstantinos Takirtakoglou
Books by Konstantinos Takirtakoglou
Book Reviews by Konstantinos Takirtakoglou
Talks by Konstantinos Takirtakoglou
in the Abbasid armies had little impact on the course of the Arab-Byzantine
conflicts. The article focuses mainly on the campaigns conducted by the
commander Bughā al-Kabīr against the Byzantine Empire and other
Caliphate enemies.
Arab historiographers and geographers recount the deeds of Nicephorus Phocas, both as Domestic and as Emperor, informing us of how the Islamic world reacted to Byzantium's renewed aggressiveness.
Except for the military sector, historians can benefit from the information provided by the Arabic sources regarding internal affairs of the Byzantien Empire, such as the bad relations of Nicephorus Phocas with the circle of Emperor Romanos II or the active role of the Armenians in the wars of that period.
This study focuses also on all the conflicts of Nicephorus Phocas, both with the Hamdanids and with the Arabs of Sicily, but allso on the campaigns against Crete and Cyprus. Particular attention is given to the demeanor of the Byzantine Emperor in these operations, as seen by the Arabic sources.
fanaticism contained in these conflicts