Some info. about Christianity in Asia including India till around 1500; Nestorian Christianity influence in Asia & India
This post is based on my part of a mail conversation. The contents may be a bit disjointed. I request the kind indulgence of readers for that.
I have been reading and viewing up on Genghiz Khan and the sacking of Baghdad by his grandson Hulagu Khan. Genghiz Khan followed shaman type religion (He worshipped Eternal Blue Sky God deity called Tengri). Genghiz Khan's son Tolui married Sorghaghtani Beki (1190-1252) (one of his wives one presumes) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorghaghtani_Beki, who was a Nestorian Christian.
An extract from her wiki page:
Married to Tolui, Genghis' youngest son, Sorghaghtani Beki became one of the most powerful and competent people in the Mongol Empire. She made policy decisions at a pivotal moment that led to the transition of the Mongol Empire towards a more cosmopolitan and sophisticated style of administration. She raised her sons to be leaders, and maneuvered the family politics so that all four of her sons, Möngke Khan, Hulagu Khan, Ariq Böke, and Kublai Khan, went on to inherit the legacy of their grandfather.
--- end wiki extract ---
Hulagu Khan, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hulagu_Khan, who led the army which sacked Baghdad in 1258 (in a horrific way)), married a Nestorian Christian (one of his wives, one presumes), like his father Tolui. In his sacking of Baghdad Hulagu spared the Nestorian Christians!
Ancient history is full of ***terrible*** killings and slaughter of people. But that is the reality of most of human history and I am forcing myself to know this past reality of human race and the influence of religion then to get a better understanding of how humans the world over behave now and how religion can be a force for better behaviour and how it sometimes can be a force for worse behaviour.
----
Europeans (Christian society in the past) and Middle East (Islamic world in the past and even today) saw border regions and kingdoms suffering directly at the hands of the Mongol hordes, with the Mongol threat being an existential threat to them. So Western and Middle Eastern accounts would typically have a very negative view of Genghiz Khan.
The videos I viewed and the articles I read, including Wikipedia, leave no doubt about the tribal ferocity of Mongol tribes of those days, whom Genghiz Khan united as a terrifying force and unleashed their horrific destructive power against any kingdom or city that resisted conquest. Note that Baghdad was asked to surrender by Hulagu which the caliph rejected, apparently in an insulting way. A battle ensued which seems to have resulted in some Mongol losses initially and which may have infuriated Hulagu. Then I think, given the horrendous ways of those days, Hulagu had to make an example of Baghdad and its caliph, for the rest of the world (Middle East and Europe in particular) to know how resistance to Mongols can result in utter ruin.
But I had not known that Genghiz Khan respected various religions and did not tax religious leaders. His kingdom allowed various religions to flourish, so long as they obeyed Mongol empire laws, and this practice was continued by his successors! I came to know of this and other positives of the Mongol empire through videos and articles I read, which seem to be far more unbiased, as compared to what I had read about him in school (which was, I think, a Euro centric view).
I think my school learning gave me an impression that Mongols were terrible people but that Europeans were, on the whole, much better than Mongols. Well, today I do not view it that way. The Romans sack of Jerusalem in 70 CE (3 to 4 decades after crucifixion of Lord Jesus Christ), seems to have been as horrific as the Mongols sack of Baghdad in 1258 CE. In both cases, there was resistance from the city/kingdom, one which was a Jewish resistance (Jerusalem being centre of Jewish faith & people) and another which was Islamic (Baghdad being viewed as centre of Islamic faith & people then). BTW neither Genghiz Khan nor his grandson Hulagu Khan or Kublai Khan were Muslims. The name Khan is of pre-Islamic origin. Many later Mongol rulers of Central Asia converted to Islam (but not Kublai Khan and his successors in China).
Now I am of the view that Mongols and some European empires (like the Roman empire) have been equally murderous whenever anybody dared to resist them and fight them. However, Eurocentric accounts of history downplay European brutality and highlight Mongol and other Asian brutality.
I think the brutal truth is that many of great/large kingdoms of the past, whether of European origin or Asian origin, have been equally brutal against those who resisted their conquest. It is a human nature thing rather than a culture thing.
----
I think India's Syrian Christians (Nasranis) were related to Nestorians in the past. Let me share relevant wiki extracts.
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_East
The Church of the East shared communion with the Great Church until the Council of Ephesus in AD 431, separating primarily over differences in Christology. The Council of Ephesus condemned Nestorius (386–451), leading to the Nestorian Schism and a subsequent exodus of Nestorius' supporters to Sasanian Persia. The existing Christians in Persia welcomed these refugees and gradually the Church of the East thus adopted the doctrine of Nestorianism, emphasizing the distinctiveness of the divine and human natures of Jesus.
Continuing as a dhimmi community following the Muslim conquest of Persia (633-654), the church played a major role in history of Christianity in Asia. Between the 9th and 14th centuries it represented the world's largest Christian denomination in terms of geographical extent. It established dioceses and communities stretching from the Mediterranean Sea and today's Iraq and Iran, to India (the Saint Thomas Christians), the Mongol kingdoms in Central Asia, and China during the Tang dynasty (7th to 9th centuries). In the 13th and 14th centuries the Church experienced a final period of expansion under the Mongol Empire, where influential Nestorian Christians sat in the Mongol court.
The Church of the East declined rapidly starting in the 14th century in the aftermath of the fragmentation of the Mongol Empire. The rising Chinese and Islamic Mongol leaderships pushed out and nearly eradicated the Church of the East and its followers. Thereafter, Nestorian Christianity remained largely confined to Upper Mesopotamia and to the Saint Thomas Christians in Kerala, India.
--- end wiki extract ---
So Syrian Christians (Saint Thomas Christians) of India were associated with Church of the East, which got so influenced by Nestorians that it is referred to as Nestorian Christianity or Nestorianism.
BTW I found it to be very interesting to know that Christianity through Church of the East/Nestorians (so an Eastern Christianity as against Roman Catholic Christianity) was quite well spread in Asia in the past (well before European colonization or dominance of Asia), including in Central Asia and in China. However, in Central Asia and China, it lost out eventually to Islam and Chinese religions (including Buddhism in China).
----
Did some more digging up which I think throws some light on the matter. Before I share the wiki extracts, the important thing to note is that the Church of the East is associated with Nestorianism theology.
Here is an interesting wiki page titled, "Nestorianism and the church in India", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestorianism_and_the_church_in_India.
An extract from it:
According to tradition, Christianity was established in India in AD 52 with the arrival of Thomas the Apostle in Cranganore (Kodungaloor). Subsequently, the Christian community of the Malabar Coast established close ties with the other Christians of the Middle East and the Persian Empire. They eventually coalesced into the Church of the East led by the Catholicos-Patriarch of Seleucia-Ctesiphon.
The Church of the East was often separated from the other ancient churches due to its location outside the Roman Empire. When Archbishop Nestorius of Constantinople was declared a heretic by the Council of Ephesus, the Church of the East refused to acknowledge his deposition because he held the same christolical position that the Church of the East had always held. Later, the "Anaphora of Mar Nestorius" came to be used by Church of the East, which for this reason has been pejoratively labelled the "Nestorian Church" by some other Christian groups. However, this is a misnomer, as Nestorius was neither the founder nor even a member of it.
When the Portuguese arrived in India in the 16th century, they were ignorant of other Christian rites. Their ignorance led to the controversial Synod of Diamper that forced the Latin Rite on the Malabar Syriac Christians in 1599, even though the Syrian Church at Malabar was already in union with Rome.[1][2][3] St. Francis Xavier himself praised bishops who provided leadership to this community—including Mar Yaqob (Jacob), Mar Joseph, and Mar Abraham—and acknowledged their communion with the Holy See.
...
[Wiki References:]
1. Encyclopaedia of sects & religious doctrines, Volume 4 By Charles George Herbermann page 1180,1181
2. Costellioe, Letters, 232–246
3. "Christen und Gewürze" : Konfrontation und Interaktion kolonialer und indigener Christentumsvarianten Klaus Koschorke (Hg.)Book in German, English, Spanish, 1998 Page 31,32
--- end wiki extract ---
Now for another wiki page: "Syro-Malabar Catholic Church", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syro-Malabar_Catholic_Church:
Some extracts from it are given below:
The Syro-Malabar Catholic Church (Classical Syriac: ܥܸܕܬܵܐ ܩܵܬܘܿܠܝܼܩܝܼ ܕܡܲܠܲܒܵܪ ܣܘܼܪܝܵܝܵܐ Edta Qatholiqi D'Malabar Suryaya; Malayalam: മലബാറിലെ സുറിയാനി കത്തോലിക്ക സഭ Malabarile Suriyani catholika Sabha; Latin: Ecclesia Syrorum Malabarensium, lit. "Church of the Malabar Syrians") or Church of Malabar Syrian Catholics is an Eastern Catholic Major Archiepiscopal Church based in Kerala, India. It is an autonomous (in Latin, sui iuris) particular church in full communion with the Pope and the worldwide Catholic Church, with self-governance under the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches. The Church is headed by the Metropolitan and Gate of all India Major Archbishop Cardinal Maran Mar George Alencherry. The name Syro-Malabar is a prefix coined from the words Syriac as the church employs the East Syriac Rite liturgy, and Malabar which is the historical name for modern Kerala. The name has been in usage in official Vatican documents since the nineteenth century.[7]
...
The Church of the East Patriarch Shemon VII Ishoyahb's unpopularity led to the schism of 1552; opponents appointed the monk Shimun VIII Yohannan Sulaqa as a rival patriarch. Sulaqa's subsequent consecration by Pope Julius III (1550–55) saw a permanent split within the Church of the East. The reunion with Rome resulted in the formation of the modern-day Chaldean Catholic Church of Iraq.[17][18] Subsequently, Church of the East Bishop Mar Abraham of Angamaly was appointed by Pope Pius IV (1559–65) as Metropolitan and Gate of all India of the Thomas Christians (Archbishop of Angamaly) in 1565.[19] In 1597, Mar Abraham of Angamaly died, he was the last bishop sent from the Church of the East. Unfortunately, the Latin Catholic Portuguese padroado Archbishop of Goa, Aleixo de Menezes, downgraded the Angamaly diocese and appointed the Jesuit Francisco Ros S.J as Archbishop of Angamaly. Menezes held the Synod of Diamper in 1599 to bring the Thomas Christians under the authority of the Archbishopric of Goa. The oppressive rule of the Portuguese padroado eventually led to a revolt in 1653, known as the Coonan Cross Oath.[20] The Puthenkuttukar, or "New Party" faction emerged after the Oath, which resisted the authority of the Portuguese padroado, under the leadership of Archdeacon Mar Thoma I, and formed the Malankara Church which entered into a new relationship with the Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch.[21][22]
The Syro-Malabar Church descends from the part of the community known as Pazhayakuttukar, or "Old Party", that after the Coonan Cross Oath in 1653, under the leadership of Archdeacon Palliveettil Mar Chandy re-entered in formal communion with the Holy See of Rome; due to the reconciliation efforts of Discalced Carmelite (O.C.D.) missionaries sent by Pope Alexander VII (1665–67). Latin Catholic Carmelite clergy from Europe served as bishops, and the Church along with the Latin Catholics was under the Apostolic Vicariate of Malabar (modern-day Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Verapoly). As per Mar Paremmakkal Thoma Kathanar's travelogue Varthamanappusthakam (dated to 1790), the Church was known then as the Malankare Kaldaya Suriyani Sabha "Malankara Chaldean Syriac Church". In 1887, the Holy See established two Apostolic Vicariates, Thrissur and Kottayam (later Changanassery) under the guidance of indigenous Syro-Malabar bishops, and named the Church as "The Syro-Malabar Church" to distinguish them from the Latins.[23]
...
[Wiki References:]
7. St. Raphael Syro Malabar Catholic Mission of Cleveland (2014)
...
17. Habbi 1966, p. 99-132, 199-230.
18. Wilmshurst 2000, p. 21-22.
19. Cite error: The named reference Charles George Herbermann was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
20. "Koonan Oath 00001" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 June 2011. Retrieved 20 May 2007.
21. Gregorios & Roberson, p. 285.
22. Vadakkekara, p. 91.
23. George Joseph Nedumparambil (2013). "A Search of the Roots of the Syro-Malabar Church in Kerala" (PDF). University of Würzburg. Retrieved 19 September 2019.
--- end wiki extracts ---
Ravi: With the above info., I think a more nuanced picture emerges. I think it seems to be true that Saint Thomas Christians (Nasranis) of Kerala, India were associated with the Church of the East (Nestorian church) but that was from the 5th century to the 14th century. During this period the Nasrani Christians of Kerala were NOT associated with the Roman Catholic Church (as the Church of the East has split from it). One does not know whether this association was only political or whether the Nestorian theology aspect also was involved through priests sent by Church of the East.
The decline of the political power of Church of the East (perhaps in part due to Islam and Chinese religions dominating over Christian religion in Central Asia and China), led to fissures in the Church of the East itself! The Chaldean Catholic church got formed as one of the splinters of the Church of the East in 1552, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaldean_Catholic_Church, which got re-unified with the Roman Catholic Church (hence its name has the word Catholic in it).
From the above Chaldean Catholic Church wiki page:
Decline of the Church of the East
Around 1400, the Turco-Mongol nomadic conqueror Timur arose out of the Eurasian Steppe to lead military campaigns across Western, Southern and Central Asia, ultimately seizing much of the Muslim world after defeating the Mamluks of Egypt and Syria, the emerging Ottoman Empire, and the declining Delhi Sultanate. Timur's conquests devastated most Assyrian bishoprics and destroyed the 4000-year-old city of Assur, which was the cultural and religious capital of the Church of the East and its followers. After the destruction brought on by Timur, the massive and organized Nestorian Church structure, which at its peak extended as far as China, Central Asia, Mongolia and India, was largely reduced to its region of origin (with the exception of the Saint Thomas Christians in India), and stayed as such until the Assyrian genocide, when a large portion of this region was entirely, ethnically and culturally cleansed of its endemic population, and in effect also ended the Shimun Branch, which had to reestablish itself in America up until 2015 when they established their new see in Erbil. Along with the destruction of the Hakkari cultural region, the Assyrians of Tur Abdin, Amid, Urfa and other regions of the southeast suffered genocide as well,[citation needed] but due to an agreement with the Turks, the Syriac Orthodox Church was able to exist in the region after the end of the genocide, and a Syriac community still exists in Turkey until this day, and is the most geographically spread out Church still functioning in Turkey, with active churches in Adiyaman, Siirt, Istanbul, and its primary area of operation and seat at Mor Gabriel Monastery in Tur Abdin.
This blow by Timur to the structure of the Church of the East may have been one of the reasons for its decline, and the subsequent rise of the Chaldean Catholic Church in 1552, which would itself later suffer schism.
--- end wiki page extract --
Now if the reader refers back to above extracts from "Syro-Malabar Catholic Church", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syro-Malabar_Catholic_Church, we can see that the Portuguese in 1599 tried to muscle in on what seems to have been the main Nasrani Christian group in Kerala which was with the Chaldean Catholic Church, and get it under its Archbishop of Goa power! Some of the Nasranis rebelled. The Pope in Rome understood their issue and sent Latin Catholic clergy to them (bypassing Portuguese archbishop of Goa). This seems to have become the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church which is reported to be the biggest group of Saint Thomas Christians in Kerala & rest of India (4 million).
Even if most of the Nasrani Christians in Kerala were under Church of the East (Nestorian church) from 5th century to 14th century, it may be very difficult to know for certain whether this was only a political power structure matter or whether Nestorian theology was also imparted/disseminated among Nasrani Christians in Kerala then.
From 1552, it seems that that majority of the Nasranis were with the newly formed Chaldean Catholic Church which linked up again with Roman Catholic church. That may have resulted in any Nestorian theology stuff that was being disseminated to the Nasranis in previous centuries, get thrown out! Now they would be getting Roman Catholic Church theology but with Latin Catholic flavour rituals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Thomas_Christians talks about the other splits (after 1552) including Malankara church associating with Syriac Orthodox church (not associated with Roman Catholic church). The Malankara church had a split in 1912 with a splinter group being the Jacobite Syrian Christian church. And there were also other splits associated with Protestant and other bodies/beliefs.
Today, among Christians in Kerala, there may be zero influence of Nestorianism. But the above wiki page extracts show that from 5th to 14th century, when Nestorian church (Church of the East) was well established in Asia, perhaps Nestorian beliefs were also disseminated among the majority of Kerala Christians. With the decline of the Church of the East in the 15th century, perhaps Nestorian beliefs dissemination among majority of Kerala Christians would have gradually stopped and got replaced by Roman Catholic Church beliefs mixed with some Latin Catholic church stuff as the majority of Kerala Christians associated with the Chaldean Catholic Church (that sprung out of the much diminished Church of the East)
----
Some browsing on the topic led to an interesting document and a web page which indicate that whether the Nasranis were Nestorian or not was a ***great controversy***. The document and the web page indicate that the controversy was raised by the Portuguese. Hmm. What I have understood from my readings on history of religion is that if some matter was very controversial in the past then coming to know the truth of the matter is made very difficult as it becomes like a political struggle with different/opposing sides pushing different (alternate) views (along with their own 'facts'/ histories).
So I think I will not spend more time on this topic even though I find it to be quite fascinating.
Here are the documents, just in case the reader wants to browse through them:
1) 383 page PDF document, https://d-nb.info/1034813099/34 titled, " A Search of the Roots of Syro-Malabar Church in Kerala " and which is (as per the document) "(A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Theology at the Cath. - Theol. Faculty of the Julius - Maximilians - University, Würzburg" Submitted By George Joseph Nedumparambil in 2013. [The university seems to be a German one, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_W%C3%BCrzburg which for some time in the past centuries was a bastion for Catholics (and against Protestants).]
Right at the beginning of the introduction to the dissertation, the author focuses on this controversy. Here is the related longish 1st paragraph from the introduction:
Our attempt in this work is basically to make a search into the veracity of the accusation namely whether the Syro-Malabar Church is Nestorian or not. The thrust for such a search is stimulated by the disparagement which this Church had to carry for years. In order to accomplish this task we will study various church fathers, certain liturgical aspects and the history of the SMC which comprises the nascent period and the time period in which SMC is supposed to have adopted this Nestorian element. Thus the scope of our study is not only from patristic point of view rather it covers also the liturgical and church historical aspects. The SMC was accused to be Nestorian at first only when it came in contact with the European colonizing forces that is to say from the 15th century onwards. She was mainly accused by the missionaries who came with the colonizers. The missionaries, those who came to India along with the colonizers, thought that everything must be in conformity with the Latin faith. It might have happened perhaps due to the ignorance of the differences in the celebration and the presence of various other rites extant in the Catholic Church. It is an unbelievable fact that quite a good number of Catholics are unaware of the fact that there are 21 Oriental churches in the Catholic Church. Thus together with these Churches and the Latin Church they form into one unit and the Catholic Church is an encompassing of 22 churches. So without knowing this basic fact many accuse other churches which do not exhibit uniformity in liturgy with that of the Latin Church, or the way of celebrating the holy Mass, that they are non-catholic or practising something heretical. The same consideration might have happened in the case of the SMC too. Thus ignorance along with a craving for power and dominance over the SMC has prompted them to criticize her as heretic. In our study we will consider how far is it true to say that SMC is Nestorian or is it true to say that there existed a strong bond between the SMC and the Nestorian Church. In our attempt to do it we will go back to the nascence of the church of SMC in Kerala and its affinities with other churches. This study is also motivated to look into the details, whether the church in Kerala, which is said to have received its faith from St. Thomas the Apostle, later, went to the wrong side in her following of Christ.
--- end 1st para of introduction ---
2) History of Syro-Malabar Catholics in Kerala, St. Raphael Syro Malabar, Catholic Mission of Cleveland, http://syromalabarccc.org/index_files/SyroMalabarHistoryPg1.htm
A relevant extract from the above page:
With the arrival of the Portuguese explorer, Vasco De Gama to Calicut on the Kerala Coast in 1498 AD, a Latin connection began to take shape. The Portugese were happy to discover the St.Thomas Christians on the West coast of India in the midst of Hindus and Muslims. But they very soon noticed the differences in liturgy and the connection to East-Syrian Church; they alleged that St.Thomas Christians believed in the Nestorian Heresy as they accepted Bishops from the East Syrian Church which officially had adopted Nestorianism. As they were living at a time soon after the council of Trent in which decision was taken to deal toughly with heretics, they were all out to "reduce the Syro-Malabarians to the Roman obedience." There were also the commercial interests of the Portuguese behind the appointment of Latin Bishops to rule the Syro-Malabarians. As the last Bishop appointed by the East Syrian Patriarch died in 1597 the Portuguese tightened their hold on the Syro-Malabarians and never permitted any more East Syrian Bishops to enter Malabar. The Synod of Diamper (Udayamperur) in 1599 convened by the Latin Archbishop Menezes of Goa thus brought an end to the connection between St.Thomas Christians and East-Syrian Church; it converted St Thomas Christians into a branch of the Latin Church and under Padroado, the colonial power of the Portuguese, making its people accept many customs with which they were not familiar. He also spread the news in Europe that Syro-Malabarians were "reduced to the Roman obedience" and accepted Catholicism as well the authority of the Pope in this Synod. The fact, however, was not so. The Syro-Malabarians had never accepted Nestorianism even though they had contact with the East Syrians and they were not at all involved in any of the Christological controversies. On the contrary, whenever they got a chance they reiterated their allegiance to the Pope and their communion with the Church of Rome. In any case, the rule of the Latin Bishops was never accepted by the Syro-Malabarians and the climax of their protest was what is known in the history as Coonan Cross Oath. The leadership of the St.Thomas Christian community pledged in this oath not to accept any more the rule of the Jesuit missionaries from among whom the Bishops were appointed.
--- end extract ---
Ravi: Interesting history! But, as I said before, it is very controversial and so I am going to stop my readings on this topic (as it will be very difficult for me to even get a decent idea of which argument seems to be true and which seems to be false).
This study has resulted in better understanding for me of history of Kerala Christians and also about how Church of the East (which got deeply influenced by Nestorianism) was well spread in many parts of Asia before Timur "virtually exterminated" the Church of the East/Nestorian Christians from the parts of Asia under his rule. The words "virtually exterminated" are from Encyclopaedia Brittanica, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Nestorianism.
[I thank wikipedia and have presumed that they will not have any objections to me sharing the above extract(s) from their website on this post which is freely viewable by all, and does not have any financial profit motive whatsoever. I similarly thank d-nb.info and George Joseph Nedumparambil, and syromalabarccc.org for above small extracts from their websites/documents.]
I have been reading and viewing up on Genghiz Khan and the sacking of Baghdad by his grandson Hulagu Khan. Genghiz Khan followed shaman type religion (He worshipped Eternal Blue Sky God deity called Tengri). Genghiz Khan's son Tolui married Sorghaghtani Beki (1190-1252) (one of his wives one presumes) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorghaghtani_Beki, who was a Nestorian Christian.
An extract from her wiki page:
Married to Tolui, Genghis' youngest son, Sorghaghtani Beki became one of the most powerful and competent people in the Mongol Empire. She made policy decisions at a pivotal moment that led to the transition of the Mongol Empire towards a more cosmopolitan and sophisticated style of administration. She raised her sons to be leaders, and maneuvered the family politics so that all four of her sons, Möngke Khan, Hulagu Khan, Ariq Böke, and Kublai Khan, went on to inherit the legacy of their grandfather.
--- end wiki extract ---
Hulagu Khan, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hulagu_Khan, who led the army which sacked Baghdad in 1258 (in a horrific way)), married a Nestorian Christian (one of his wives, one presumes), like his father Tolui. In his sacking of Baghdad Hulagu spared the Nestorian Christians!
Ancient history is full of ***terrible*** killings and slaughter of people. But that is the reality of most of human history and I am forcing myself to know this past reality of human race and the influence of religion then to get a better understanding of how humans the world over behave now and how religion can be a force for better behaviour and how it sometimes can be a force for worse behaviour.
----
Europeans (Christian society in the past) and Middle East (Islamic world in the past and even today) saw border regions and kingdoms suffering directly at the hands of the Mongol hordes, with the Mongol threat being an existential threat to them. So Western and Middle Eastern accounts would typically have a very negative view of Genghiz Khan.
The videos I viewed and the articles I read, including Wikipedia, leave no doubt about the tribal ferocity of Mongol tribes of those days, whom Genghiz Khan united as a terrifying force and unleashed their horrific destructive power against any kingdom or city that resisted conquest. Note that Baghdad was asked to surrender by Hulagu which the caliph rejected, apparently in an insulting way. A battle ensued which seems to have resulted in some Mongol losses initially and which may have infuriated Hulagu. Then I think, given the horrendous ways of those days, Hulagu had to make an example of Baghdad and its caliph, for the rest of the world (Middle East and Europe in particular) to know how resistance to Mongols can result in utter ruin.
But I had not known that Genghiz Khan respected various religions and did not tax religious leaders. His kingdom allowed various religions to flourish, so long as they obeyed Mongol empire laws, and this practice was continued by his successors! I came to know of this and other positives of the Mongol empire through videos and articles I read, which seem to be far more unbiased, as compared to what I had read about him in school (which was, I think, a Euro centric view).
I think my school learning gave me an impression that Mongols were terrible people but that Europeans were, on the whole, much better than Mongols. Well, today I do not view it that way. The Romans sack of Jerusalem in 70 CE (3 to 4 decades after crucifixion of Lord Jesus Christ), seems to have been as horrific as the Mongols sack of Baghdad in 1258 CE. In both cases, there was resistance from the city/kingdom, one which was a Jewish resistance (Jerusalem being centre of Jewish faith & people) and another which was Islamic (Baghdad being viewed as centre of Islamic faith & people then). BTW neither Genghiz Khan nor his grandson Hulagu Khan or Kublai Khan were Muslims. The name Khan is of pre-Islamic origin. Many later Mongol rulers of Central Asia converted to Islam (but not Kublai Khan and his successors in China).
Now I am of the view that Mongols and some European empires (like the Roman empire) have been equally murderous whenever anybody dared to resist them and fight them. However, Eurocentric accounts of history downplay European brutality and highlight Mongol and other Asian brutality.
I think the brutal truth is that many of great/large kingdoms of the past, whether of European origin or Asian origin, have been equally brutal against those who resisted their conquest. It is a human nature thing rather than a culture thing.
----
I think India's Syrian Christians (Nasranis) were related to Nestorians in the past. Let me share relevant wiki extracts.
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_East
The Church of the East shared communion with the Great Church until the Council of Ephesus in AD 431, separating primarily over differences in Christology. The Council of Ephesus condemned Nestorius (386–451), leading to the Nestorian Schism and a subsequent exodus of Nestorius' supporters to Sasanian Persia. The existing Christians in Persia welcomed these refugees and gradually the Church of the East thus adopted the doctrine of Nestorianism, emphasizing the distinctiveness of the divine and human natures of Jesus.
Continuing as a dhimmi community following the Muslim conquest of Persia (633-654), the church played a major role in history of Christianity in Asia. Between the 9th and 14th centuries it represented the world's largest Christian denomination in terms of geographical extent. It established dioceses and communities stretching from the Mediterranean Sea and today's Iraq and Iran, to India (the Saint Thomas Christians), the Mongol kingdoms in Central Asia, and China during the Tang dynasty (7th to 9th centuries). In the 13th and 14th centuries the Church experienced a final period of expansion under the Mongol Empire, where influential Nestorian Christians sat in the Mongol court.
The Church of the East declined rapidly starting in the 14th century in the aftermath of the fragmentation of the Mongol Empire. The rising Chinese and Islamic Mongol leaderships pushed out and nearly eradicated the Church of the East and its followers. Thereafter, Nestorian Christianity remained largely confined to Upper Mesopotamia and to the Saint Thomas Christians in Kerala, India.
--- end wiki extract ---
So Syrian Christians (Saint Thomas Christians) of India were associated with Church of the East, which got so influenced by Nestorians that it is referred to as Nestorian Christianity or Nestorianism.
BTW I found it to be very interesting to know that Christianity through Church of the East/Nestorians (so an Eastern Christianity as against Roman Catholic Christianity) was quite well spread in Asia in the past (well before European colonization or dominance of Asia), including in Central Asia and in China. However, in Central Asia and China, it lost out eventually to Islam and Chinese religions (including Buddhism in China).
----
Did some more digging up which I think throws some light on the matter. Before I share the wiki extracts, the important thing to note is that the Church of the East is associated with Nestorianism theology.
Here is an interesting wiki page titled, "Nestorianism and the church in India", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestorianism_and_the_church_in_India.
An extract from it:
According to tradition, Christianity was established in India in AD 52 with the arrival of Thomas the Apostle in Cranganore (Kodungaloor). Subsequently, the Christian community of the Malabar Coast established close ties with the other Christians of the Middle East and the Persian Empire. They eventually coalesced into the Church of the East led by the Catholicos-Patriarch of Seleucia-Ctesiphon.
The Church of the East was often separated from the other ancient churches due to its location outside the Roman Empire. When Archbishop Nestorius of Constantinople was declared a heretic by the Council of Ephesus, the Church of the East refused to acknowledge his deposition because he held the same christolical position that the Church of the East had always held. Later, the "Anaphora of Mar Nestorius" came to be used by Church of the East, which for this reason has been pejoratively labelled the "Nestorian Church" by some other Christian groups. However, this is a misnomer, as Nestorius was neither the founder nor even a member of it.
When the Portuguese arrived in India in the 16th century, they were ignorant of other Christian rites. Their ignorance led to the controversial Synod of Diamper that forced the Latin Rite on the Malabar Syriac Christians in 1599, even though the Syrian Church at Malabar was already in union with Rome.[1][2][3] St. Francis Xavier himself praised bishops who provided leadership to this community—including Mar Yaqob (Jacob), Mar Joseph, and Mar Abraham—and acknowledged their communion with the Holy See.
...
[Wiki References:]
1. Encyclopaedia of sects & religious doctrines, Volume 4 By Charles George Herbermann page 1180,1181
2. Costellioe, Letters, 232–246
3. "Christen und Gewürze" : Konfrontation und Interaktion kolonialer und indigener Christentumsvarianten Klaus Koschorke (Hg.)Book in German, English, Spanish, 1998 Page 31,32
--- end wiki extract ---
Now for another wiki page: "Syro-Malabar Catholic Church", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syro-Malabar_Catholic_Church:
Some extracts from it are given below:
The Syro-Malabar Catholic Church (Classical Syriac: ܥܸܕܬܵܐ ܩܵܬܘܿܠܝܼܩܝܼ ܕܡܲܠܲܒܵܪ ܣܘܼܪܝܵܝܵܐ Edta Qatholiqi D'Malabar Suryaya; Malayalam: മലബാറിലെ സുറിയാനി കത്തോലിക്ക സഭ Malabarile Suriyani catholika Sabha; Latin: Ecclesia Syrorum Malabarensium, lit. "Church of the Malabar Syrians") or Church of Malabar Syrian Catholics is an Eastern Catholic Major Archiepiscopal Church based in Kerala, India. It is an autonomous (in Latin, sui iuris) particular church in full communion with the Pope and the worldwide Catholic Church, with self-governance under the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches. The Church is headed by the Metropolitan and Gate of all India Major Archbishop Cardinal Maran Mar George Alencherry. The name Syro-Malabar is a prefix coined from the words Syriac as the church employs the East Syriac Rite liturgy, and Malabar which is the historical name for modern Kerala. The name has been in usage in official Vatican documents since the nineteenth century.[7]
...
The Church of the East Patriarch Shemon VII Ishoyahb's unpopularity led to the schism of 1552; opponents appointed the monk Shimun VIII Yohannan Sulaqa as a rival patriarch. Sulaqa's subsequent consecration by Pope Julius III (1550–55) saw a permanent split within the Church of the East. The reunion with Rome resulted in the formation of the modern-day Chaldean Catholic Church of Iraq.[17][18] Subsequently, Church of the East Bishop Mar Abraham of Angamaly was appointed by Pope Pius IV (1559–65) as Metropolitan and Gate of all India of the Thomas Christians (Archbishop of Angamaly) in 1565.[19] In 1597, Mar Abraham of Angamaly died, he was the last bishop sent from the Church of the East. Unfortunately, the Latin Catholic Portuguese padroado Archbishop of Goa, Aleixo de Menezes, downgraded the Angamaly diocese and appointed the Jesuit Francisco Ros S.J as Archbishop of Angamaly. Menezes held the Synod of Diamper in 1599 to bring the Thomas Christians under the authority of the Archbishopric of Goa. The oppressive rule of the Portuguese padroado eventually led to a revolt in 1653, known as the Coonan Cross Oath.[20] The Puthenkuttukar, or "New Party" faction emerged after the Oath, which resisted the authority of the Portuguese padroado, under the leadership of Archdeacon Mar Thoma I, and formed the Malankara Church which entered into a new relationship with the Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch.[21][22]
The Syro-Malabar Church descends from the part of the community known as Pazhayakuttukar, or "Old Party", that after the Coonan Cross Oath in 1653, under the leadership of Archdeacon Palliveettil Mar Chandy re-entered in formal communion with the Holy See of Rome; due to the reconciliation efforts of Discalced Carmelite (O.C.D.) missionaries sent by Pope Alexander VII (1665–67). Latin Catholic Carmelite clergy from Europe served as bishops, and the Church along with the Latin Catholics was under the Apostolic Vicariate of Malabar (modern-day Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Verapoly). As per Mar Paremmakkal Thoma Kathanar's travelogue Varthamanappusthakam (dated to 1790), the Church was known then as the Malankare Kaldaya Suriyani Sabha "Malankara Chaldean Syriac Church". In 1887, the Holy See established two Apostolic Vicariates, Thrissur and Kottayam (later Changanassery) under the guidance of indigenous Syro-Malabar bishops, and named the Church as "The Syro-Malabar Church" to distinguish them from the Latins.[23]
...
[Wiki References:]
7. St. Raphael Syro Malabar Catholic Mission of Cleveland (2014)
...
17. Habbi 1966, p. 99-132, 199-230.
18. Wilmshurst 2000, p. 21-22.
19. Cite error: The named reference Charles George Herbermann was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
20. "Koonan Oath 00001" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 June 2011. Retrieved 20 May 2007.
21. Gregorios & Roberson, p. 285.
22. Vadakkekara, p. 91.
23. George Joseph Nedumparambil (2013). "A Search of the Roots of the Syro-Malabar Church in Kerala" (PDF). University of Würzburg. Retrieved 19 September 2019.
--- end wiki extracts ---
Ravi: With the above info., I think a more nuanced picture emerges. I think it seems to be true that Saint Thomas Christians (Nasranis) of Kerala, India were associated with the Church of the East (Nestorian church) but that was from the 5th century to the 14th century. During this period the Nasrani Christians of Kerala were NOT associated with the Roman Catholic Church (as the Church of the East has split from it). One does not know whether this association was only political or whether the Nestorian theology aspect also was involved through priests sent by Church of the East.
The decline of the political power of Church of the East (perhaps in part due to Islam and Chinese religions dominating over Christian religion in Central Asia and China), led to fissures in the Church of the East itself! The Chaldean Catholic church got formed as one of the splinters of the Church of the East in 1552, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaldean_Catholic_Church, which got re-unified with the Roman Catholic Church (hence its name has the word Catholic in it).
From the above Chaldean Catholic Church wiki page:
Decline of the Church of the East
Around 1400, the Turco-Mongol nomadic conqueror Timur arose out of the Eurasian Steppe to lead military campaigns across Western, Southern and Central Asia, ultimately seizing much of the Muslim world after defeating the Mamluks of Egypt and Syria, the emerging Ottoman Empire, and the declining Delhi Sultanate. Timur's conquests devastated most Assyrian bishoprics and destroyed the 4000-year-old city of Assur, which was the cultural and religious capital of the Church of the East and its followers. After the destruction brought on by Timur, the massive and organized Nestorian Church structure, which at its peak extended as far as China, Central Asia, Mongolia and India, was largely reduced to its region of origin (with the exception of the Saint Thomas Christians in India), and stayed as such until the Assyrian genocide, when a large portion of this region was entirely, ethnically and culturally cleansed of its endemic population, and in effect also ended the Shimun Branch, which had to reestablish itself in America up until 2015 when they established their new see in Erbil. Along with the destruction of the Hakkari cultural region, the Assyrians of Tur Abdin, Amid, Urfa and other regions of the southeast suffered genocide as well,[citation needed] but due to an agreement with the Turks, the Syriac Orthodox Church was able to exist in the region after the end of the genocide, and a Syriac community still exists in Turkey until this day, and is the most geographically spread out Church still functioning in Turkey, with active churches in Adiyaman, Siirt, Istanbul, and its primary area of operation and seat at Mor Gabriel Monastery in Tur Abdin.
This blow by Timur to the structure of the Church of the East may have been one of the reasons for its decline, and the subsequent rise of the Chaldean Catholic Church in 1552, which would itself later suffer schism.
--- end wiki page extract --
Now if the reader refers back to above extracts from "Syro-Malabar Catholic Church", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syro-Malabar_Catholic_Church, we can see that the Portuguese in 1599 tried to muscle in on what seems to have been the main Nasrani Christian group in Kerala which was with the Chaldean Catholic Church, and get it under its Archbishop of Goa power! Some of the Nasranis rebelled. The Pope in Rome understood their issue and sent Latin Catholic clergy to them (bypassing Portuguese archbishop of Goa). This seems to have become the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church which is reported to be the biggest group of Saint Thomas Christians in Kerala & rest of India (4 million).
Even if most of the Nasrani Christians in Kerala were under Church of the East (Nestorian church) from 5th century to 14th century, it may be very difficult to know for certain whether this was only a political power structure matter or whether Nestorian theology was also imparted/disseminated among Nasrani Christians in Kerala then.
From 1552, it seems that that majority of the Nasranis were with the newly formed Chaldean Catholic Church which linked up again with Roman Catholic church. That may have resulted in any Nestorian theology stuff that was being disseminated to the Nasranis in previous centuries, get thrown out! Now they would be getting Roman Catholic Church theology but with Latin Catholic flavour rituals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Thomas_Christians talks about the other splits (after 1552) including Malankara church associating with Syriac Orthodox church (not associated with Roman Catholic church). The Malankara church had a split in 1912 with a splinter group being the Jacobite Syrian Christian church. And there were also other splits associated with Protestant and other bodies/beliefs.
Today, among Christians in Kerala, there may be zero influence of Nestorianism. But the above wiki page extracts show that from 5th to 14th century, when Nestorian church (Church of the East) was well established in Asia, perhaps Nestorian beliefs were also disseminated among the majority of Kerala Christians. With the decline of the Church of the East in the 15th century, perhaps Nestorian beliefs dissemination among majority of Kerala Christians would have gradually stopped and got replaced by Roman Catholic Church beliefs mixed with some Latin Catholic church stuff as the majority of Kerala Christians associated with the Chaldean Catholic Church (that sprung out of the much diminished Church of the East)
----
Some browsing on the topic led to an interesting document and a web page which indicate that whether the Nasranis were Nestorian or not was a ***great controversy***. The document and the web page indicate that the controversy was raised by the Portuguese. Hmm. What I have understood from my readings on history of religion is that if some matter was very controversial in the past then coming to know the truth of the matter is made very difficult as it becomes like a political struggle with different/opposing sides pushing different (alternate) views (along with their own 'facts'/ histories).
So I think I will not spend more time on this topic even though I find it to be quite fascinating.
Here are the documents, just in case the reader wants to browse through them:
1) 383 page PDF document, https://d-nb.info/1034813099/34 titled, " A Search of the Roots of Syro-Malabar Church in Kerala " and which is (as per the document) "(A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Theology at the Cath. - Theol. Faculty of the Julius - Maximilians - University, Würzburg" Submitted By George Joseph Nedumparambil in 2013. [The university seems to be a German one, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_W%C3%BCrzburg which for some time in the past centuries was a bastion for Catholics (and against Protestants).]
Right at the beginning of the introduction to the dissertation, the author focuses on this controversy. Here is the related longish 1st paragraph from the introduction:
Our attempt in this work is basically to make a search into the veracity of the accusation namely whether the Syro-Malabar Church is Nestorian or not. The thrust for such a search is stimulated by the disparagement which this Church had to carry for years. In order to accomplish this task we will study various church fathers, certain liturgical aspects and the history of the SMC which comprises the nascent period and the time period in which SMC is supposed to have adopted this Nestorian element. Thus the scope of our study is not only from patristic point of view rather it covers also the liturgical and church historical aspects. The SMC was accused to be Nestorian at first only when it came in contact with the European colonizing forces that is to say from the 15th century onwards. She was mainly accused by the missionaries who came with the colonizers. The missionaries, those who came to India along with the colonizers, thought that everything must be in conformity with the Latin faith. It might have happened perhaps due to the ignorance of the differences in the celebration and the presence of various other rites extant in the Catholic Church. It is an unbelievable fact that quite a good number of Catholics are unaware of the fact that there are 21 Oriental churches in the Catholic Church. Thus together with these Churches and the Latin Church they form into one unit and the Catholic Church is an encompassing of 22 churches. So without knowing this basic fact many accuse other churches which do not exhibit uniformity in liturgy with that of the Latin Church, or the way of celebrating the holy Mass, that they are non-catholic or practising something heretical. The same consideration might have happened in the case of the SMC too. Thus ignorance along with a craving for power and dominance over the SMC has prompted them to criticize her as heretic. In our study we will consider how far is it true to say that SMC is Nestorian or is it true to say that there existed a strong bond between the SMC and the Nestorian Church. In our attempt to do it we will go back to the nascence of the church of SMC in Kerala and its affinities with other churches. This study is also motivated to look into the details, whether the church in Kerala, which is said to have received its faith from St. Thomas the Apostle, later, went to the wrong side in her following of Christ.
--- end 1st para of introduction ---
2) History of Syro-Malabar Catholics in Kerala, St. Raphael Syro Malabar, Catholic Mission of Cleveland, http://syromalabarccc.org/index_files/SyroMalabarHistoryPg1.htm
A relevant extract from the above page:
With the arrival of the Portuguese explorer, Vasco De Gama to Calicut on the Kerala Coast in 1498 AD, a Latin connection began to take shape. The Portugese were happy to discover the St.Thomas Christians on the West coast of India in the midst of Hindus and Muslims. But they very soon noticed the differences in liturgy and the connection to East-Syrian Church; they alleged that St.Thomas Christians believed in the Nestorian Heresy as they accepted Bishops from the East Syrian Church which officially had adopted Nestorianism. As they were living at a time soon after the council of Trent in which decision was taken to deal toughly with heretics, they were all out to "reduce the Syro-Malabarians to the Roman obedience." There were also the commercial interests of the Portuguese behind the appointment of Latin Bishops to rule the Syro-Malabarians. As the last Bishop appointed by the East Syrian Patriarch died in 1597 the Portuguese tightened their hold on the Syro-Malabarians and never permitted any more East Syrian Bishops to enter Malabar. The Synod of Diamper (Udayamperur) in 1599 convened by the Latin Archbishop Menezes of Goa thus brought an end to the connection between St.Thomas Christians and East-Syrian Church; it converted St Thomas Christians into a branch of the Latin Church and under Padroado, the colonial power of the Portuguese, making its people accept many customs with which they were not familiar. He also spread the news in Europe that Syro-Malabarians were "reduced to the Roman obedience" and accepted Catholicism as well the authority of the Pope in this Synod. The fact, however, was not so. The Syro-Malabarians had never accepted Nestorianism even though they had contact with the East Syrians and they were not at all involved in any of the Christological controversies. On the contrary, whenever they got a chance they reiterated their allegiance to the Pope and their communion with the Church of Rome. In any case, the rule of the Latin Bishops was never accepted by the Syro-Malabarians and the climax of their protest was what is known in the history as Coonan Cross Oath. The leadership of the St.Thomas Christian community pledged in this oath not to accept any more the rule of the Jesuit missionaries from among whom the Bishops were appointed.
--- end extract ---
Ravi: Interesting history! But, as I said before, it is very controversial and so I am going to stop my readings on this topic (as it will be very difficult for me to even get a decent idea of which argument seems to be true and which seems to be false).
This study has resulted in better understanding for me of history of Kerala Christians and also about how Church of the East (which got deeply influenced by Nestorianism) was well spread in many parts of Asia before Timur "virtually exterminated" the Church of the East/Nestorian Christians from the parts of Asia under his rule. The words "virtually exterminated" are from Encyclopaedia Brittanica, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Nestorianism.
[I thank wikipedia and have presumed that they will not have any objections to me sharing the above extract(s) from their website on this post which is freely viewable by all, and does not have any financial profit motive whatsoever. I similarly thank d-nb.info and George Joseph Nedumparambil, and syromalabarccc.org for above small extracts from their websites/documents.]
Comments
Post a Comment