For many decades Nina Garsoïan has been addressing the most complex, controversial and insufficiently investigated issues of Armenian history, and the current publication is not an exception. This important volume addresses the period from c. 600 to 750, a part of the InterregnumFootnote ¹ that was critical in the formation of Christian Armenian identity and was marked by the gradual strengthening of the role of the autocephalous Armenian Church. The author's intention is ‘to collect and offer an introductory overview of the main components that have contributed to the definition of Armenia's identity’ (p. vii), and to ‘attempt to create a new pattern and propose a new methodology for the study of Armenian history’ (p. viii).

The prologue briefly discusses the socio-political situation in Armenia before the period under investigation and underscores the drawbacks of the term ‘Golden Age’ used by Mekhitarist scholars in the nineteenth century to describe fifth-century Armenia, which does not reflect the religiously and politically fragmented nature of the society and is only applicable to the emergence of native Armenian literature of that period. Furthermore, Garsoïan examines the primary and secondary sources the study of which will enhance our understanding of this period: besides Armenian sources, she highlights the importance of Greek, Syriac, Persian, Georgian and Arab texts, as well as of ‘the hitherto neglected visual material, especially the vast architectural development’ of the seventh century (p. xvi).Footnote ²

Chapter i focuses on the traditional view of the Interregnum, which is largely based on the evaluations of (Pseudo)-Sebēos (seventh-century) and Łewond vardapet (eighth-century). They construct a grim picture of Armenian society of the sixth to mid-eighth centuries, primarily characterised by lack of national and political unity owing to various internal and external conflicts. After discussing the primary sources Garsoïan, however, expresses a reasonable doubt ‘whether political continuity and a centralized state are the ultimate criteria and valid guidelines for a study of Armenia's checkered history’ (p. 23).

Chapter ii provides an alternative reading of the Armenian sources, focusing on evidence that clearly evinces periods of relative prosperity and ‘effervescent creativity rather than one of unimaginative and mediocre stagnation’ (p. 40). Particularly, Garsoïan points at numerous references to extensive construction projects, as well as to a considerable volume of non-religious translations of the Hellenizing School, which gave a major boost to the development of education in Armenia. Thus, she effectively rejects the traditional perception of the Interregnum as a period of cultural degeneration.

While chapter iii is a summary of earlier work, references to newer publications are also made.Footnote ³ It examines the main historico-political factors that (in)directly contributed to the formation of the doctrine, law and liturgy of the Armenian Church. The author highlights the external pressure from Byzantium, Persia and later the Caliphate, the split within the Armenian Church into supporters and opponents of Chalcedon, the emergence of the Paulician heresy, the propagation of ‘extremist Monophysitism’ by Julian of Halicarnassus and its impact on the leadership of kat‘ołikos Komitas and on the teaching of Yovhannēs Mayragomec‘i, as well as on the use of unleavened bread and of unmixed wine in the chalice at the eucharist. At the end of the seventh century the dominance of the Caliphate ensured relative stability in the region, and the Armenian Church welcomed the chance to commence its internal reorganisation, a process which ended during the catholicate of Yovhannēs Ōjnec‘i (717–28) with the formulation of the doctrine of the Armenian Church, and the emergence of the Church as the central institution unifying Armenians in the absence of statehood.

The author elaborates on how developments in the political situation in the region alongside the reformation of the Church affect the self-perception of Armenians in chapter iv. Despite the divided nature of the Armenian lands, the absence of rigid borders created auspicious conditions for the cultivation of cultural homogeneity, which was achieved after the establishment of the province of Armīniya by the Arabs at the turn of the seventh century.

In the epilogue Garsoïan re-states her belief that the criterion of a unified state as a constant on which the prosperity of a country should be built is not helpful for studying the Interregnum. On the contrary, one should focus on ‘the constants that proved to be the fundamental components of Armenia's identity’ (p. 123) such as the efflorescence of national and scholarly literature after the invention of the alphabet, monastic establishments as centres of intellectual activity, the kinship ties of noble families and the strengthening of the national Church. When relative political stability was achieved during the Umayyad period, these constants led to the emergence of the concept of a single nation, albeit one without a united independent state.

The author fully achieves the aims set out in the preface to her book by presenting a new methodological approach to the study of the Armenian history of the Interregnum and by providing a valuable introductory analysis of the most crucial factors that influenced the formation of the Armenian identity in that period. This is a significant contribution to the field of Armenian studies, which provides a broad basis for further research.