Latest / The Story of Armenia: Survival Through Empires and Genocide — Fexingo History / The Zakarids: Armenia's Last Feudal Lords Under Mongol Rule
Transcript
- Lucas: So we've talked a lot about the big powers — the Mongols, the Mamluks, the Byzantines — but what about the Armenians who actually ran things on the ground under those empires? Luna: You mean the local lords, the nakharars? Lucas: Exactly. And after the fall of the Bagratid kingdom, the most successful of those were the Zakarids. They rose to prominence in the late 1100s and early 1200s, just as the Mongols were steamrolling across Asia. And they managed something remarkable — they carved out a semi-autonomous principality that lasted for generations. Luna: I've heard the name Zakare, but I don't know much about them. Lucas: Zakare and his brother Ivane. They were Armenian nobles who originally served the Georgian kingdom — remember, much of eastern Armenia was under Georgian control at the time. But when the Mongols arrived in the 1230s, the Zakarids wisely submitted rather than fight. And because they were useful — they controlled key fortresses and had a solid military — the Mongols let them keep their lands as vassals. Lucas: This is where it gets interesting. The Mongols imposed a heavy tax called the tamgha — a commercial tax on all goods — plus they demanded troops for their campaigns. But the Zakarids were able to negotiate some exemptions and protections. They kept the Armenian Church running, they rebuilt monasteries, and they commissioned those beautiful khachkars — cross-stones — that you still see all over Armenia. Luna: So they were essentially middlemen, protecting Armenian interests while serving the Mongols. Lucas: Exactly. And they were very good at it. Zakare was the military leader — he commanded Armenian troops in Mongol campaigns, even all the way to the Middle East. Ivane was more the administrator, handling the court and the taxes. Together, they controlled a huge territory — from Lake Sevan to the Araxes River, including the old Bagratid capital of Ani. Lucas: But there was a tension. Ivane converted to Chalcedonian Christianity — that is, the Byzantine rite — while Zakare remained Armenian Apostolic. That caused a split in the family and in the Armenian Church. Some historians think Ivane did it to curry favor with the Georgians, who were mostly Chalcedonian. Either way, it shows how complex identity politics were. Luna: Did the split affect their rule? Lucas: Surprisingly, not too much. They still worked together. But it did create two competing branches of the family — one pro-Georgian and Chalcedonian, the other more traditional Armenian. Over time, the Chalcedonian branch faded, and the Apostolic branch carried on the name. Lucas: The Zakarids are also famous for their patronage of learning. They supported the great scholar Mkhitar Gosh, who compiled the first Armenian law code — the Datastanagirk'. And they sponsored the building of the monasteries at Haghpat and Sanahin, which are UNESCO World Heritage sites today. Luna: Those are stunning. I've seen pictures of the gavit — those large halls with the central columns. Lucas: Right. The gavit was a unique Armenian architectural feature — a kind of narthex that served as a gathering space. The Zakarids funded those additions, and they also donated illuminated manuscripts. It was a way of asserting Armenian identity even under Mongol suzerainty. Lucas: Now, the Mongol yoke wasn't light. There were uprisings, like the one in 1256 led by the monk and prince Hovhannes of Khachen. But the Zakarids generally played it safe. They knew that open rebellion would mean annihilation. So they paid the taxes, provided the troops, and waited. Lucas: And in the long run, their strategy worked. The Zakarian principality outlasted the Ilkhanate itself. It only really collapsed in the 14th century, when Timur's invasions devastated the region. But by then, they had preserved Armenian statehood for over a century. Luna: It's such a contrast to the Mamikonians, who fought and died at Avarayr. Lucas: Totally different approach. The Mamikonians chose martyrdom. The Zakarids chose survival. And both are valid responses to empire. The Zakarids understood that sometimes the best way to protect your people is to bend, not break. They kept the church alive, the culture alive, and they passed on a legacy that later Armenian princes would draw on. Luna: Speaking of keeping things alive — you know, this show is also kept alive by listeners who chip in a few dollars. If you've been stepping through these centuries with us, buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo really does make a difference. Lucas: Yeah, it's a small thing — a couple of bucks a month — but it means we can keep doing deep dives into lesser-known figures like the Zakarids, without ads or sponsors. So if you've gotten something out of these conversations, that's the place. Luna: And we're genuinely grateful to everyone who does. It lets us stay independent. Lucas: Alright, back to the 13th century. One of the most fascinating moments in Zakarian rule was their involvement in the Mongol civil wars — the succession struggles after Möngke Khan's death. Zakare's son, another Zakare, actually fought on the side of Hulagu against Berke. That's how deep their integration was. Luna: So they were literally fighting other Mongols for the Mongols. Lucas: Yes. And that's a dangerous game. If you pick the wrong side, you're wiped out. But the Zakarids managed to back the winners consistently — until Timur, anyway. And that's the thing about their story: it's not a heroic tragedy like Avarayr. It's a story of quiet, pragmatic endurance. And I think that deserves just as much attention. Luna: I agree. Sometimes survival is the most heroic thing you can do. Lucas: Exactly. And the Zakarids left a mark that you can still see — in those monasteries, in the law code of Mkhitar Gosh, in the very idea that Armenia could persist even without a king. They were the last great Armenian feudal lords before the long centuries of Ottoman and Persian rule. And they showed that Armenian statehood wasn't just about crowns — it was about communities, churches, and the will to endure.