Ecclesiastical Relationships 5th Century to 11th Century

 

Introduction

We have already seen previously that the Malankara Church could maintain a close relationship with Antiochean Patriarchate after the arrival of Thomas Cana and Bishop Joseph of Edessa. This relation helps the Malankara Church to come into close contact with the Persian Church under the Patriarchate of Antioch. Three persons are important in the history of the Malankara Church from the 5^th to the 11^th centuries, they are Cosmas, the Alexandrian Traveller and the Syrian bishops from Persia. I shall describe in this chapter the arrival of these important persons, the establishment of the Persian Catholicate and the Hierarchical Jurisdictional power which ruled the Malankara Church during that particular period.

3.1. Persian Catholicate and Nestorianism

 In this section we discuss the establishment of the Persian Catholicate and it’s the division and the establishment of Persian Maphrianate.

3.1.1. Establishment of Persian Catholicate

The need of the establishment of the Persian Catholicate was the political problems of Persia. The political barriers between the Persian and Roman Empires and the bitter rivalry of its rulers made intercommunications between the two regions much more difficult and dangerous.[1] There were instances where clergy from Persia who were ordained by the Patriarch of Antioch were put to death alleging to be spies. The rulers of Persian Empire treated Christians as the spies of Roman emperor.[2]

Fr. Placid says:

The Bishop or Metropolitan of Seleucia used to receive Episcopal consecration from Antioch. But owing to the dangers attending on the journey to Antioch, the bishops of the East were given powers to consecrate him.[3]

It therefore, became necessary for the Patriarch to vest authority in an ecclesiastical dignitary to carry on the administration in the Persian region. Mosheim says that “the Patriarch of Antioch voluntarily ceded a part of his jurisdiction to Seleucia.”[4] So the Catholicos of Seleucia acted as the deputy of the Patriarch of Antioch[5], in the Persian Empire, with some exclusive privileges to consecrate bishops on behalf of the Patriarch.

Gibbon says:

The Catholicos were elected and ordained by their own suffragans ; but their filial dependence on the patriarchs of Antioch is attested by the canons of the oriental church.[6]

Neale says:

In the earlier ages the Catholicate of Chaldea was, as it were, a vicarial jurisdiction of the See of Antioch, in the same manner that the Metran of Ethiopia was dependent on that of Alexandria.[7]..…Still later, Nestorianism swallowed up the Catholicate of Chaldea, which was, in a mannaer, dependent on Antioch.[8] The See of Antioch allowed that of Seleucia to consecrate its own Prelates, who were thenceforward called Catholici, i.e. Procurators-General, of Antioch[9].

Bernad says:

The St. Thomas Christians were receiving bishops sent by the Catholicos (Katholicos) of Seleucia who was subordinate to the See of Antioch. But when that See became Nestorian, they used to receive only those Bishops who were sent by that Catholicos who as before was subordinate to the See of Antioch. The See of Seleucia was subordinate to the See of from the very beginning. There is evidence for it in Canon II of the Council of Constantinople (381) which places the eastern dioceses (beyond the boundaries of the Roman Empire) under the Patriarch of Antioch, who used to appoint an Archbishop, entitled Catholicos (Primatial Archbishop) to govern the Christians of India, Persia and other countries.[10]

From the above mentioned matters we understand that the Persian Catholicate was under the Patriarchate of Antioch and he had accepted the subjection of the Patriarchate of Antioch.

3.1.2. Nestorianism in Persian Church

In the previous section we have seen that the Catholicos of Persia obeyed and respected the Patriarch of Antioch[11]. When the Persian church was under Antioch, Nestorianism crept into the Persian Church.

3.1.2.1. Nestorius and Barsauma

In 428 A.D., Nestore was a bishop of Constantinople.[12] He showed great zeal against the few remaining advocates of the Arian heresy. But while combating one heresy, he fell into another. He had allowed Anastasius, a newly ordained priest of Constantinople to preach against the heretics. In one of his sermons, Anastasius said that it was improper to give Mary the title ‘Theotokos’ or Mother of God. ‘Let no one’, said he, ‘designate the Blessed Virgin as the Mother of God. Mary was merely human and God cannot be born of a human creature’.[13] The council of Ephesus in A.D.431,[14] examined the writings of Nestorius, discussed the term ‘Theotokos’, and finally the Council unanimously condemned the doctrines of Nestorius. The writings of Nestorius, however, found favour with some influential persons, and two of them, Ibas and Thomas Barsaumaa, were obliged to leave the school of Edessa for their advocacy of the Nestorian heresy.[15] Barsauma was the bishop of Nisibis in (435-489).[16] The Nestorians, who had been turned out of their homes at Edessa, were protected by him. In 498, Babaeus, whom Barsumas had won over to Nestorianism, ascended the throne of Seleucia. The following year he held a synod in which the Nestorian party was organised.[17]

E.M. Philip says about this topic:

From the chronicles of Gregarious Bar Hebraeus, an intelligent and well-informed writer of the thirteenth century; we learn that Nestorianism was forced upon Seleucia by a treacherous act of Bar Souma, Bishop of Nisibin. The Catholicos, who was an orthodox deputy of the See of Antioch, was invited to a Provincial Synod to be held at Antioch. In reply, he communicated to his superior the dangers consequent upon his leaving his station. The letter contained some references to the hostile attitude of Pheroz, King of Persia, towards the Orthodox Church. This letter fell into the hands of Bar Souma, who availed himself of the opportunity to instigate Pheroz against the orthodox. The result was that the Catholicos was martyred, and a nominee of Bar Souma was elevated to the See of Seleucia. Not long after  this, in a Council held in A.D. 498, Seleucia adopted the teachings of Nestorius, and its Head declared himself independent assuming the title of Patriarch of Babylon[18]

3.1.3. The Division of the Persian Catholicate

The Catholicos of Seleucia adopted Nestorianism in A.D. 498,[19] and its Head declared himself independent, assuming the title of ‘Patriarch of Babylon’.[20] As a result of Nestorianism there are two groups aroused in Persia at the same time.[21] Many church under the Catholicos, some clung fast to the old and primitive faith, while others became converts to Nestorianism.[22]  At that time of these disputes, there was a movement by Jacob Bardaeus.

See Mosheim says about Jacob Bardaeus’ work:

When the Monophysites were nearly in despair, and very few of their bishops remained, some of them being dead and others in captivity; an obscure man, Jacobus surnamed Baradaeus or Zanzalus, to distinguish him from others of the name, restored their fallen state. This indigent monk, a most indefatigable and persevering man, being ordained bishop by a few bishops who were confined in prison, travelled over all the East, on foot, constituted a vast number of bishops and presbyters, received every where the depressed spirits of the Monophysites, and was so efficient, by his eloquence and his astonishing diligence, that when he died, in the year 578, at Edessa, where he had been bishop, he left his sect in a very flourishing state in Syria, in Mesopotamia, in Armenia, in Egypt, Nubia, and Abyssinia, and in other countries. He extinguished nearly all the dissensions among the Monophysites; and as their churches were so widely dispersed in the East, that the bishop of Antioch could not well govern them all, he associated with him a Maphrian or primate of the East, whose residence was at Tagritum on the borders of Armenia. His efforts were not a little aided, in Egypt and the neighbouring regions, by Theodosius of Alexandria. From this man as the second father of the sect, all the Monophysites in the East are called Jacobites.[23]

In A.D. 559 Jacob Bardaeus consecrated Abudemmeh[24] as Catholicos of Seleucia, and the new dignitary bore the same relation to the Patriarch of Antioch as the Catholicos of Seleucia did to that See before the introduction of Nestorianism.[25]

3.1.3.1. Establishment of Persian Maphrianate in Tigrit

The Patriarch of Antioch established the Maphrianate. The Maphrian[26] owed allegiance to the Patriarch and was considered as the vicar of the Patriarch in Persia.[27]The title ‘Maphrian’ came into usage since AD 629. The office of the ‘Maphrian of the East’ was founded to take care of the orthodox faithful, living in the dioceses of the ancient territory of the Persian Sassanid Empire and who were under the Patriarchate of Antioch.[28] The transition of the title, from ‘Catholicos’ to ‘Maphrian’, was effected by the Syrian Jacobites to maintain their identity and distinctiveness from those who embraced Nestorianism. Tigrit was originally the main centre of the members of the Jacobite community and also the eastern head quarters of the Church.[29]

3.2. Malankara Church in Fifth Century

In this section we are discussing under which hierarchical jurisdiction was the Malankara Church in the fifth century. There is no historical proof that the Malankara Syrian Christians were Nestorians during this period. And also there are no documents in favour of a Roman Catholic mission. But at the same time there is a manuscript which supports the fact that the Malankara church was under the Antiochean Patriarchate. In the Canons of the General Council of Constantinople, as given in the Syriac manuscript No. 14528 in the British Museum- a manuscript of A.D. 500 we find and injunction in the following words: “The Bishop of Alexandria shall govern those (Churches) that are in Mizraim (Egypt), and the Bishop of the East (Seleucia) those of the East only, the seniority which is given by the canons of Nikia (Nicea) to the Church of Antioch being preserved.[30]

Roman Catholic Archbishop Mor Ivanious[31] quotes:

In the 5^th century the church of Malabar, along with the sister Churches of the more Eastern parts of Asia, was indirectly under the supreme jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Antioch, the direct and immediate authority being the Catholicus of Seleucia. In the fifth century, neither the Patriarch of Antioch nor the Catholicus of Seleucia was Nestorian. We may, therefore conclude that the Syrian Church in Malabar, which was ruled by these ecclesiastics, was not Nestorian at that time.[32]

Bernad says: “The St.Thomas Christians were receiving bishops sent by the Catholicos (Katholicos) of Seleucia who was subordinate to the See of Antioch.”[33]

3.2.1. Daniel the Indian Priest at Edessa

Mor Komai, assisted by an Indian priest Daniel, translated the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans from Greek into Syriac in about the year 425 A. D. It stands as proof of the presence of Indian students in the ecclesiastical centre, Edessa[34]. We have already mentioned that the territory including Edessa was under the Antiochean Hierarchical Jurisdiction.

Menachery’s Encyclopaedia quotes: “This time (5^th century) Edessa was already in the Byzantine Empire, and became the centre of the West Syrian tradition.”[35]

It must be specially noted that the Nestorianism had not be entered in Edessa when Daniel was there. And also the church of Edessa was under the Hierarchical Jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Antioch. This can be highlighted as the greatest proof of the strong relation of the Malankara Church with Patriarchate of Antioch.

3.3. Arrival of Cosmas

Cosmos was an Alexandrian traveller,[36] who visited in India in A.D. 522.[37] Cosmas Indicopleustes was firstly a merchant, afterwards monk and author, who lived in the time of the emperor Justinian.[38] He wrote several things, particularly the Christian Topography. He visited Taprobane (Ceylon) and Male (Malabar), the place which is in the South India. Moreover he met a bishop, who was appointed from Persia.[39] 

3.3.1. The Faith of Cosmas and Bishop, whom met in India

Some historians argued that Cosmas was a Nestorian and the Bishop which, Cosmas saw also a Nestorian.[40] Let us discuss this and also the faith followed by Cosmas and the bishop which he saw in Malabar.

3.3.1.1. The Faith of Cosmas

Cosmas is qualified to be a Nestorian by some of the historians.[41] Let us try to see the credibility of the statement of these historians.

(a) Almost all the historians agree that Comas was an Alexandrian.[42] At the time of his arrival in South India, Nestorianism had not reached Alexandria. Because the followers of the Nestorius and the people of Alexandrian church were in acute enmity. In that time the Patriarchs of Alexandria were always against Nestorian heresy.[43] In the same way had he been a Nestorian, he would not have led the rest of his time among the Alexandrians who were the enemies of Nestorian faith, but in a territory under the Nestorian Catholicos. Had Cosmas been a Nestorian he would not have accepted a tradition prohibited by his church.[44] Cosmas after his journey over India join a religious monastery and became a monk.[45] This acting of Cosmas is contrary to Nestorian principles, because the synod convoked by Nestorian Catholicos of Seleucia in 499 A.D. prohibited celibate life for priests and permitted remarriage for the widowed priests[46] and when even Catholicos permitted to marry.[47]

E.M. Philip says:

Cosmas was a native of Alexandria and a descendent of the flock of St. Cyril, who had vehemently opposed Nestorius and who had left behind him a lasting impression of his religious views in the Alexandrian Church. His successor Dioscoros was a supporter of Jacobite theories. In fact, Nestorianism never entered the precincts of the Church in Egypt. Under such circumstances, we must presume that Cosmas was a Jacobite or at least that he was not a Nestorian.[48]

(b) The word used by Cosmas to refer to Blessed Virgin Mary is Theotokos[49] which means mother of God.[50] This is a topic discuss extensively in the Ephesus Synod. A Nestorian would never have used this word.[51]

Fr. Placid says: “From Cosmas’ words it may be deduced that these Christians and Cosmas had the same faith. Now Cosmas was a non Nestorian.”[52]

3.3.1.2. The Faith of the Bishop, whom Cosmas met in India

Some historians argued that the bishop, whom Cosmas met in India, was a Nestorian.[53] Now let us try to see the tradition and faith of the bishop who was in Malabar at that time. The first main thing is: About the bishop whom Cosmas met in India, he has mentioned that he was a bishop appointed in Persia. The bishop had never been qualified to be a Nestorian by Cosmas.[54]

See Panjikaran, the Roman Catholic historian rejects that opinion the bishop was Nestorian.

Hence, bishops ordained in Persia who came to the Indian Church, could not have been Nestorians. Further, from the words of Cosmos, “we have found the Church not destroyed, but very widely diffused,” we may infer that he is speaking of the ancient Faith which, there was a tradition, had been long established in India. This, it seems to be, is what he means, for he writes to his brethren at home that the rumour that the ancient Church was destroyed is not true, and that he has seen this Church with his own eyes not destroyed but widely diffused. Nestorianism moreover, had been seated on the throne of Seleucia only for twenty four years. We cannot believe that within so short a period it could have been established in India and also destroyed. In any case, therefore, the bishop whom Cosmos met in India could not have been a Nestorian, and there is nothing in the words of Cosmos to show that he was one.[55]

Arch Bishop Mor Ivanious says:

And Cosmas throws no light upon the nature of its creed. What he says about the Persian origin of its Bishops, he might have heard from the Christians of Ceylon or from the pepper merchants that frequented the ports of Malabar.[56]

A Syrian Catholic says:

In the earliest histories there is no mention at all of Nestorian heresy in India.[57]Cosmas Indicopleustes saw in 535 and mentions an anonymous Bishop in Malabar who was ordained from Persia, and no mention is made of any heresy.[58]

Another important thing is that: The bishop above mentioned might have had received Jacobite faith before his entrance to the Nestorian church. Moreover could a bishop, old enough be sent to a far away place like India? The bishop who had been ordained in Persia might have reached India before the expansion of Nestorianism in Persian Church.[59]

See E.M. Philip clarifies about this topic:

We have seen that the Catholicos of Seleucia adopted the Nestorian creed only in A.D. 498 and it is within a quarter of a century from this date that Cosmas met, in Malabar and other parts of India, a Church organised in a parochial form. The missionaries of the Church of England have been working in India under the auspices of the British Government, which owns suzerainty over the whole continent. In spite of the Ruling Power, it took them nearly a century to establish an organised church in India. The Portuguese missionaries, with their inquisition, threats and offers of pecuniary aid under the influence of a bigoted intolerant Government could not establish the Church of Rome in India within so short a period. Still we are asked to believe that in spite of troubles and commotions that attended the change of creed at home. The poor mendicant missionaries and agents of the Nestorian Patriarch of Babylon who had no regular support from their headquarters and no political influence in India, and who were not endowed with the short space of twenty four years, establish a Church in South India, extend it from the coast of Malabar to the island of Ceylon, and organise it in the fully developed manner in which Cosmas met it. The testimony of Cosmas is enough to convince an unbiased mind that the Church of Malabar must have been planted many years earlier than A.D. 522, and by some hands not tainted with Nestorian heresy.[60]

Another proof we can get is from Assemanus; When Seleucia Catholicos who was under the Antiochean hierarchy for centuries, embraced Nestorian principles and declared independence we would strongly doubt whether the bishop of Persia also accepted it. It is because Jesujabus Adjabenus the Nestorian Patriarch of Seleucia, in his letter to Simon the primate of Persia and Metropolitian of Ravidshir says:

Since the gift of God has been flowing through the narrow ways of the canons, and through lawful messengers allow it to flow. Behold, the earth is full of bishops, priests and faithful, who, like the stars of heaven, are increasing every day. But in your country, from the time you have revolted from the canons of the people of India; not from India alone, which extends from the shores of Persia as far as Colon (Quilon) a space of more than twelve hundred parsangs-but also your own country of Persia lies in darkness deprived of the light of Divine doctrine which shines forth through bishops of the truth.[61]

The letter clearly shows that, when the Catholicos of Seleucia became Nestorian, the Primate of Persia, true to his religion, refused any longer to obey a Head who had strayed away from the ancient Faith.[62] From this we understand that the Nestorian heresy had not been entered in all the churches under the Seleucian Catholicate.

Fr. Daniel says:

Which is the Persian church to which the Indian Church owed allegiance: Nestorian or Jacobite (Orthodox)? In the 6^th century both Nestorian and Jacobite (Orthodox) Churches flourished in Persia, and we are not quite sure to which church the Indian church owed allegiance. Cosmos does not say anything about it. He simply says that Bishops came from Persia to India. The greater probability is that the orthodox party used to send their bishops to the Indian church.[63]

In the beginning of 19^th century, Danish Missionaries says:

In the year 530, Cosmos, and Egyptian merchant, found in Hindostan and Ceylon many churches and several bishops. The Syrian Christians enjoyed a succession of bishops appointed by the Patriarch of Antioch, from the third century till they were invaded by the Portuguese.[64]

From the above statements and proofs we conclude that the bishop whom Cosmas saw in India was not a Nestorian and he might have come to India was not a Nestorian and he might have come to India from Persia a church under Antiochean Patriarchate, before the expansion Nestorian faith there.

3.3.2. Ecclesiastical Relations of Malankara Church in the 6^th and 7^th Centuries

Thereby we can conclude that the Bishop which, Cosmas saw in India was not a Nestorian but he was a bishop from Persia who was under Hierarchical Jurisdiction of Antioch. Hence the tradition and faith followed by the Malankara Church would have been the same as that of the Antiochean Church.[65] This point is supported by many notable historians.

Malte-Brun says that, “They acknowledge the Patriarch of Antioch as their early head.[66] They are called sometimes the Syrian Christians.”[67]

Mackenzie says:

The coming to this coast of bishops from Persia seems to have been interrupted in the seventh century by a revolt of the Persian Metropolitan against the Nestorian Patriarch of Babylon, the Metropolitan of Seleucia.[68]

Panjikaran, the prominent historian of the Roman Catholic Church asserts that the Malankara Church was not a Nestorian church in the seventh century.[69] He says:

When the Catholicos of Seleucia became Nestorian in 498 A.D., the Metropolitan of Persia refused to obey him and continued in that state of independence till the time of the Nestorian Patriarch Timotheus in 800 A.D.[70]

Hough records that the ascendancy attained by the Jacobites in the East in this and the succeeding centuries was so great that their Patriarch of Antioch reckoned a hundred and three Episcopal and twenty Metropolitan. See under him, and we have reason to believe, as will be shown later on, that his authority extended up to Malabar at that early period.[71]

Barsalibi writes as follows, “Lo, all the Armenians, Egyptians, Nubians, Ethiopians, and the majority of the Indians, and the Libyans….accept the faith of St. Cyril, St. Dioscorus, and Severus the Great.[72]

Now let us move to some of the proofs of the seventh century. The famous historians testify that the Syrian Christians of Malankara had made a request to the Jacobite Patriarch of Alexandria who was a Syrian, to sent bishops to their church.

Renaudotius says: “Venit paulò pòst sacerdos quidam ex India ad Simonem Patriarcham rogans ut Episcopum Indis ordinaret,” [73]

Portuguese traveller Lobo says: “Indians had desired bishops from Simon the Syrian, Patriarch of Alexandria.”[74]

Wilford says: “In the reign of the Caliph Abdulmalec, in the latter end of the seventh century, the Christians of India sent to Simon, the Syrian and Jacobite Patriarch of Alexandria, requesting that he would send them a bishop.”[75] D’ Herbelot also records the same matter.[76]

According to many historians’ opinion let us consider this, as Neal says: “Shortly afterwards, a Priest arrived from India, requesting Simon to ordain a Bishop for that country.”[77]

Francis Day says: “About A.D. 696, according to one authority, a Bishop of the Church of the Jacobites arrived in India, from Alexandria.”[78]

Let us see the words of Montgomery Martin: “In the reign of the Caliph Abdulmalu, which was about A.D. 680, the Christians of India, sent to Simon, the Syrian Patriarch of Alexandria, requesting he would send him a bishop.”[79]

Here naturally a question arises: Why did the Malankara Church which was under the Patriarchate of Antioch for centuries depended on Alexandria in that particular time? The answer of question is given by Kasiso Isahak Bar Armaltho (Syrian Catholic Priest) in his work. He says:

In these days (7^th century) the Indian Christians sent their nominees to the Patriarch of Antioch to be consecrated bishop-when they could not have entrance to the Syrian territory they went to Alexandria to Patriarch Simon and requested him to consecrate a bishop for them.[80]

Severus Ibn Al-Mukaffa[81] says: “After this there came a priest from the people of the Indians to Abba Simon, to ask of him that he would ordain for him a bishop for the Indians.”[82]

More than being in mutual concern and cooperation, Antiochean Patriarchate and Alexandrian Patriarchate had a mutual consent of installing the Bishops. This can be realised better from the above mentioned historian: 

Then Abba Simon wrote a synodical epistle to Julian, Patriarch of Antioch, at which the latter marvelled; and Simon sent it by certain bishops, and in it he reminded Julian of unity, and that this one faith and unity were between the two sees, Alexandria and Antioch.[83]

Etheridge give an account about this. He says: “Renaudot speaks of a patriarch of Alexandria of that creed sending a bishop to India so far back as the end of the eighth century. It would appear that this body subsequently received their metropolitan from the Jacobite Patriarchs of Antioch.”[84]

Richard Collins says:

Nor can there be really much doubt that from the time when Jacob Albaradi (Baraddeus) in the sixth century, espoused the cause of the Eutychians (Jacobite), and enabled them to secure the Sees of Antioch and Alexandria, the Syrian Church in Malabar owned the Eutychian (Jacobite) Patriarch, who was the most powerful Bishop in the East, and were therefore Eutychians, or as they are also called from Jacob Albaradi, Jacobites.[85]

Percival records that from the time of the acceptance of the Jacobite faith by the church of Catholicate of Seleucia, the Malabar Syrian Christians accepted that faith.[86]

In accordance with the above mentioned statements of the historians we clearly understand that the Malankara Church was under the Antiochean Patriarchate.

3.4. Persian Crosses in Mylapore

In this section we discuss about the crosses excavated by the Portuguese authorities in Mount St.Thomas near Mylapore. Later that cross had been placed in the Chapel of Roman Catholics in Mylapore. Moreover the cross found from Kottayam Church.[87] The antiquity of crosses, the sentence written on it, whose faith does this sentence reveal, will be discussed in this section.

3.4.1. The antiquity of Cross and Language

Almost all the historians opine that the cross it had been excavated in Mylapore is from the 7^th or 8^th century[88] and the language engraved on the cross is Pahlavi.[89] Since Pahlavi was not a language of South India, somebody might have brought this cross to India from Persia. Moreover Pahlavi was the royal language of the Sassenian Dynasty of Persia.[90]

3.4.2. Inscription of Cross

The inscription on the cross at the Mount and on the older cross at Kottayam has been thus rendered by Dr.Burnell: “In punishment by the cross was the suffering of this one, who is the true Christ, God above and Guide ever pure”[91]

Dr. Haug translates it thus: “He that believes in the Messiah and in God in the height and also in the Holy Ghost is in the grace of him who suffered the pain of the Cross”.[92]

Among these above mentioned statements, the statement of Burnell is generally accepted by all.[93]The one who suffered the punishment of the Cross ‘is the true Christ and God above’, i.e. He had the true human nature and the divine nature, and was therefore, at the time of the crucifixation, both man and God. Now, this belief is opposed to Nestorianism,[94] which inculcates that only the man Christ suffered.[95]

E.M. Philip clarifies about this topic:

What, then was the doctrine concerning the Crucified One, which the inscription in question exhibits? It is that ‘the One who is the true Christ, God above and Guide ever pure’, suffered ‘in punishment in cross’. The meaning of this sentence is plain, and no far-fetched argument is necessary to show that this inscription attributes Divinity to Christ in His crucified position. A Nestorian always objects to the use of such language as ‘God suffered’, ‘God died’, in reference to the Passion and Death of our Lord. ‘Woe and woe again to all who say that God died is a particular form in which he anathematizes those who attribute Divinity to Christ in His crucified position. His conception of Jesus Christ is that he has two persons, one human and the other divine, and that it was the man Jesus or the human person that suffered on the cross. In this respect there was nothing peculiarly characteristic of Indian Nestorianism…On the other hand, let us compare the wording of the inscription with the doctrine taught and believed by the Jacobite Church. A Jacobite bishop has to confess at the time of his consecration that Christ is of one person and one nature compounded of divinity and humanity, that ‘at the time of His death was the separated from His humanity’, that ‘His death was the separation of His soul from the body or from His soul’. The Jacobite trisagion contains the following clause: ‘God that was crucified for us, have mercy on us’. The peculiar Christological dogma of the Jacobite Church set forth in their theological books and Church ordinals is plainly visible in this monumental inscription of the eight century, and it is a clear proof that the Church of Malabar was Jacobite in that century.[96]

3.4.3. Persian Crosses in Kottayam Church

Here we try to see another of the ancient two crosses kept in the Kottayam Valiyapally. The crosses were, as the tradition says, brought to this Church from a still older Church at Cranganore when the Syrian Christians emigrated to Kottayam.[97] But the cross, besides a line in Pahlavi; it contains also one in the ordinary Estranghela character.[98] The letters engraved on this cross have similarity with that of excavated in Mylapore.[99] Historians reveal that it was made in the 10^th or 11^th century.[100] Because, Estranghela language was used before only 12^th century. See Badger says:

All the Syriac MSS., Nestorian as well as Jacobite, up to about the twelfth century, are written in the Estrangheli alphabet, consisting of uncial characters which are now used only for the heading of chapters, ornamental calligraphy, and monumental inscriptions. About that period a change seems to have taken place gradually and the characters now in use became generally adopted.[101]

The inscription on the later cross at Kottayam has been thus rendered by Dr. Burnell. Estranghela Syriac:-“Let me not glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ”. Pahlavi: - “Who is the true Messiah and God above and Holy Ghost”.[102] Even taking this translation as it stands, it is opposed to the doctrines of Nestorianism. For it says that our Lord Jesus Christ, “Who is the true Messiah and God above, and Holy Ghost”. Suffered on the cross, i.e., the Godhead suffered on the cross. Hence it is clear that this bas-relief cross and this inscription could not have been put up here by Nestorians.[103]

Giving stress to the sentence written on the cross let us analyse the faith of the Malankara Church according to the historians.

B.Vadakkekara says:

These were revered because they were expressions of their Christian faith. Labelling it ‘ Manichean’ or ‘Nestorian’ finds justification neither from tradition nor from history. The ‘St Thomas Cross continues to be rightly venerated as it is the most ancient Christian emblem as yet discovered in India.[104]

Koodapuzha says:

The Manicheans do not seem to have developed any veneration of the cross! The  recent attempts of a few persons who try to vilify the Syriac heritage of the St.Thomas Christians are trying to link the St.Thomas Cross with the Manicheans! As they have no solid historical scholarship to offer in support of their position their assertions reveal their incompetence in this matter.[105]

E.M. Philip says: “The creed of the Malabar Church in the tenth century, during which the latest cross (Kottayam cross) came into existence, must, therefore, have been anti Nestorian or Jacobite.”[106]

Menachery’s Encyclopaedia quotes:

This translation indicates that the crucified Christ is God which is the faith of the Antiochean Syrian Orthodox Church as opposed to that of Nestorians. This makes it clear that in the 8th century prevailing here was the faith of the Antiochean Orthodox Church.[107]

Daniel says:

These inscriptions show the connection between the Indian Church and the Persian Church continued to exist till the 8^th or 9^th century at least. The Indian Church was most probably connected with the Jacobite (Orthodox) Church in Persia.[108]

Archbishop Mor Ivanious says:

At that time (7^th or 8^th century) the Nestorians and Jacobites were the two predominant Christian communities in Persia. The Christological difference between the two Churches was often made the subject of hot controversy between theologians of the two schools. Under these circumstances, if a monument was set up by one of these parties, it is quite natural that the inscription on that monument would be the peculiar doctrine held by that party. And the doctrine set forth in this inscription on that monument would be the peculiar doctrine held by that party. And the doctrine set forth in this inscription is most truly Jacobite. These considerations show not only that the inscription is decidedly anti-Nestorian, but also that it is Jacobite…..Thus we  see that the Syrian Christians of Malabar were not Nestorians, but Jacobites at this time.[109]

According to the proofs and the statements of historians we can clearly assert that the Malankara Church was not at all Nestorian at that time. Moreover we have seen that these crosses had been brought from Persia during the time that there were two equal powers: (a) Nestorians under the Babylonian Patriarch. (b) The Syrian Christians of the Persian Maphrianate under the Antiochean Patriarchate. We can emphatically conclude that the letters written on the cross excavated in Mount St. Thomas near Mylapore and Kottayam Church was not the expression of the faith of the Nestorians of Babylonian Patriarch, but of the church of Persian Maphrianate under the Hierarchical Jurisdiction of Antiochean Patriarchate.

3.5. Second Syrian Migration

In this section we discuss the arrival of Mor Sabor and Mor Proth and under whose apostolic Jurisdiction were they.

3.5.1. Arrival of Mor Sabor and Mor Proth

In A.D. 825, Sapor Isho, reached Malankara with a group of immigrants, from Persia.[110] He was accompanied by the two bishops, Mor Sabor and Mor Proth.[111] They went to the king Shakirbirti, and asked from him a piece of land in which they could build a church and erect a town. He gave them the amount of land they desired, and they built a church and erected a town in the district of Kullam (Kollam).[112] They were saintly persons amply proven by the fact that there were many churches in their names which is corroborated by the records of the decisions of the Synod of Diamper.[113]

3.5.2. Religious Identity of Mor Sabor and Mor Proth

Decree XXV (Action VIII) of the Diampor Synod, held under the leadership of Roman Catholic Archbishop Menezis, says that they were heretics.[114] Wherefore the Synod doth command, That all the Churches which are dedicated to them, be dedicated to all the Saints, and that Festivities used to be kept to their Honour and the Nerchas (Votive offerings) that used to be given upon their days, shall be given on All Saints day, being the first of November: and for the future there be no more Churches dedicated to them, Churches and Festivites being never to be dedicated, nor Prayers made to any but to Saints canonized and approved by the Church.[115] From this we can clearly understand that they were not Roman Catholics.

But on the contrary some historians argue that they were Nestorians.[116] Now let us examine it. In Malankara there is a popular legend behind the arrival of these bishops. Let us see that legend:-

The throne of Antioch ruled over directly the administration of Tigrit. At that time two dayaroyos (celibates) from Uzali in Mesopotamia of Tigrit diocese were called to Jerusalem and the Patriarch of Antioch Mar Ignatius Yosappa/ Joseph consecrated them as Metropolitans. They were members of Mar Eugene dayara in Tigrit. They were sent to Malankara by the Patriarch of Antioch for the welfare of the people in this land. They took some stone crosses, which were kept in Mar Eugene dayara and with a group of Syrians they started their journey to Malankara. On the way two ships were shattered in tempest and the remaining two ships reached Kollam in 825. These fathers were Mar Sapor and Mar Proth.[117]

In A.D. 1950, there was a Nestorian Church history book published ‘Thirusabha Charithram’[118]. It including the Nestorian church of India’s ancestor bishops and fathers who visited and guided their church in Kerala from their origin in the pages 206-222. It is not included the names of Sabor and Proth[119]

Koodapuzha says:

We have no clear evidences that they were neither Nestorians nor they converted the Christians of India into Nestorianism. Had they been converted anybody into Nestorianism there wood have been the proofs of different arguments in the history in favor of and against such activities.[120]

Panjikaran says:

They led so saintly a life that many churches were dedicated in their name, and we shall see that Archbishop Menezes changed the names of such churches, and dedicated them to “All Saints” at the Synod of Diampor, for the only reason that they came from Babylon. There is, moreover, not a shred of evidence to prove that they were Nestorians.[121]

In the works of Assemanus and some other writers, we have a list of the bishops sent out to the East by Thimotheus, the then Nestorian Patriarch. But the names of Sabor and Proth are not included in this list.[122] Archbishop Ivaniose clarifies about Assemanus list:

The only Bishops sent our by Timotheus to India and China were Thomas, Zache, Seno, Ephraem, Simeon, Ananias and David. Again, looking at the Jacobite Church in Persia, we find, that the Jacobite Catholicus of Selucia claimed Malabar as part of his diocese.[123]

Fr. Placid says:

The names of two bishops, namely of Sabor and Proth, who, according to Le Quien, came to Malabar in the 9^th century are not found in the list of bishops sent to India by the Patriarchs of Seleucia. This would mean that they were sent by the Catholicos, who was under Antioch.[124]

C.V. Cheriyan records that had they (Mor Sapor and Mor Proth) been converted anybody into Nestorianism there wood has been the proofs of different point of view in the history in favor of and against such activities.[125]

Fr. Eldho Varghese who made a study on the arrival of Mor Sabor and Mor Proth. After having interviewed Mar Aprem Mooken, the present head of the Nestorian Church in India has brought out as a result of his study that neither the immigrant community nor their ancestors had any relation with them. In his research he has mentioned Mor Sapor and Mor Proth had come from Persia, a church under the Hierarchical Jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Antioch.[126]

Bailey says:

From that time, bishops came regularly from Antioch to Malabar; but the archdeacon and chief persons were appointed from the Christians in Malabar. In A.D. 825, a merchant, named Sabareso, and two Syrian bishops, Mar Chaboor and Mar Apprott, came to Malabar, and dwelt at Quilon.[127]

Archbishop Mor Ivanious says:

The Jacobite Catholicus of Seleucia was contesting the supremacy of the East with his Nestorian rival. It is, therefore, quite natural that the Jacobite Catholicus would not at this time hesitate to strengthen his hold on the See of Malabar by sending out Bishops to that distant community. Hence we presume that Mar Sapor and Mar Peroz and the colony of Christians that settled in the neighbourhood of Quilon in A.D. 822, were Jacobites.[128]

Bernard Thoma[129]says that the Diamper Synod condemned Mor Sapor and Mor Proth to be not heretics. Daniel records that Mor Sabor and Mor Proth were likely to be orthodox prelates.[130] E.M. Philip puts forward another statement in order to prove that Mor Sabor and Mor Proth were not Nestorians, but Jacobite prelates. He says:

The second Sanasanam(Copper plate) was one granted to the head of this colony. By this, the Raja of Quilon, Sthanu Ravi Guptha, conferred certain privileges on the Christians under him and certain lands on the Tharisa Church at Quilon. Tharisa is a Syriac word meaning straight or orthodox, and it is a title applied by the Jacobites to their Church. In all prayers for the prosperity of their Church. In all prayers for the prosperity of their Church, the phrase used in their theological books to express their communion is tharisa church.[131]

The feast of these saints are celebrated neither in the Nestorian, nor Roman Catholic churches. Today in those churches where a feast of these saints is conducted are the churches under the Patriarch of Antioch. For example, Mor Sapor and Mor Proth bishop’s annual feast conducted in the ancient Mar Sabor Aprodh Church at Akaparambu.[132]

From the above mentioned references and writings of historians we understand that Mor Sabor and Mor Proth, who visited Malankara Church in the beginning of 9^th century were neither Nestorians nor Roman Catholics. On the other hand they arrived in Malankara from the Persian Church which was under the Patriarch of Antioch.

3.6. Ecclesiastical relations of Malankara Church in the 10^th and 11^th Centuries

In those places where the discussed cross of the Kottayam church we have seen that the Malankara Church was under the Patriarch of Antioch in the 10^th and 11^th centuries. Together with this, let us examine some quotations of some of the eminent historians.

Hough records that, His (Patriarch of Antioch) authority at this time extended to Persia, Arabia, Syria, Mesopotamia, Armenia and even to Malabar.[133] Paulino records that Renaudot quotes Allatius as saying that the authority of Antioch extended over Asia, the East and the Indies.[134]

Conclusion

We have been seen the history of the Malankara Church from the 5^th to the11^th centuries. The important events of this periods is the establishments of the Persian Catholicate and the influence of Nestorianism in this church; the re-establishment of the Catholicate under the name Maphrianate in Tigrit under the leadership of Antiochean Patriarchate in order to protect the orthodox faith from the intrusion of Nestorianism. The main events of the Malankara Church in this period are, the arrival of Cosmas, an Alexandrian and the arrival of the Jacobite Syrian fathers, Mor Sabor and Mor Proth from Persia. Another topic we also discussed was the Persian cross and the interpretations of the writings on them. After having analysed the history of the Malankara church during this period we explicitly understand that the Roman Catholic faith has not yet reached here in these centuries. Moreover since a delegate of the Pope of Rome had not been sent to the church of Malankara we can categorically assert that Malankara Church had not received the faith of the Roman Catholic Church.

---

[1] IORWERTH EIDDON STEPHEN EDWARDS, The Cambridge Ancient History, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998. p.411-413

[2] AUGUSTUS NEANDER, General History of the Christian Religion and Church, By JOSEPH TORREY, Crocker &Brewster, Vol.2, Boston, 1854.  p.105.

[3] Fr. PLACID T.O. C.D., The Syrian Church of Malabar, K.E.JOB (Ed.), Changanacherry, 1938; Reprinted by GEORGE MENACHERY, The Nazranies, The Indian Church History Classics,Vol.1, SARAS, Trissur, 1998. p. 364.

[4] JOHN LAWRENCE VON MOSHEIM, Institutes of Ecclesiastical History, Ancient and Modern, JAMES MURDOCK, Vol.1, New York, 1854. p.324.

[5] FR.BERNAD, A brief sketch of the History of the St.Thomas  Christians, ICHC, p.295.

[6] EDWARD GIBBON, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman empire, J&J Harper, Vol. III, New York, 1831.p.270.

[7]  JOHN MANSON NEALE, A History of the Holy Eastern Church, Part1. 1850. p.125.

[8] JOHN MANSON NEALE, A History of the Holy Eastern Church, Part1, 1850. p.124.

[9] JOHN MANSON NEALE, A History of the Holy Eastern Church, Part1,  p.141.

[10] FR.BERNAD, A brief sketch of the History of the St.Thomas  Christians, ROMEO THOMAS(Ed.), St.Joseph Press, Mannanam, 1924; Reprinted by GEORGE MENACHERY, The Nazranies, The Indian Church History Classics,Vol.1, SARAS, Trissur,1998. p. 296.

[11] Fr. PLACID T.O. C.D., The Syrian Church of Malabar, ICHC, p.364.

[12] JOHN C.L. GIESELER, A Text book of Church History, Harper Brothers Publishers, Vol.1, New York, 1857. p.340.

[13] JOHN ALZONG, Universal Church History, Vol. I., Dublin, 1895. p.415-416; Cited in JOSEPH C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, St. Joseph Industrial School Press, 1914; Reprinted by GEORGE MENACHERY, The Nazranies, The Indian Church History Classics,Vol.1, SARAS, Trissur,1998.p.280-281.

[14] THOMAS MILNER, History of the seven Churches of Asia, London, 1832. p.192.

[15] JOSEPH C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.280-281.

[16] JOHN C.L. GIESELER, A Text book of Church History, Harper Brothers Publishers, Vol.1, New York, 1857.p.354.

[17] JOSEPH C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.280-281.

[18] E.M.PHILIP, The Indian Church of St. Thomas, p.72-73.

[19] ELI SMITH, H.G.O. DWIGHT, (Eds.), Missionary Researches in Armenia: Including a Journey Through Asia Minor, and into Geogrgia and Persia, with a visit to the Nestorian and Chaldean Christians of Oormiah and salmas, George Wightman and Paternoster Row, London, 1834. p. 363-365.

[20] E.M.PHILIP, The Indian Church of St. Thomas, p.73.

[21] FR.BERNAD, A brief sketch of the History of the St.Thomas  Christians, ICHC, p.295.

[22] P.T. GHEEVARGHESE, Suriyani Kristhiyanikal Nestoriar ayirunno? Mal. (Where the Syrian Christians Nestorians?), Parumala, 1907; Seminary Publications, Mulanthuruthy, 1994. p.24.

[23] JOHN LAWRENCE VON MOSHEIM, Institutes of Ecclesiastical History ; Ancient and Modern, By JAMES MURDOCK, Vol.1,New York 1854. p.417-418.

[24] G.CHEDIATH & G. APPASSERY, Bar Ebraya-Sabha Charithram-Randam Bhagam,(Mal.), Vadavathoor, OIRS, 1990. p.49.

[25] JOHN MANSON NEALE, A History of the Holy Eastern Church, Part.1, General Introduction, London, 1850. p.152.

[26] The term ‘Maphrian’ is derived from the Syriac word ‘afri’, meaning, “to make fruitful”. In the mid 13th century the title ‘Catholicos’ was adopted by some occupants of the Maphrianate. It is this title that is being used in India today, while the title ‘Maphrian’ is no longer used.

[27] DAVID DANIEL, The Orthodox Church of India, Rachel David, New Delhi, 1986. p.85.

[28] E.R.HAMBYE, Dimensions of Eastern Christianity, Vadavathoor, OIRS, 1983. p.65.

[29] Dr.CURIAN KANIYANPARAMBIL, Suriyanisabha Charithravum Viswasa Sathyangalum (Mal.), Seminary Publications, Mulanthuruthy, 2003. p.788.

[30] GEORGE BROADLEY HOWARD, The Canons of the Primitive Church: Together with the Creeds of Nica and Constantinople, and the Definition of the Faith Set Forth at Chalcedon, Published by J. Parker, London, 1896. p.56; Cited in P.T. GHEEVARGHESE, Suriyani Kristhiyanikal Nestoriar ayirunno? p.20.

[31] He was the first Archbishop of Syro Malankara Catholic Church. His first name was P.T. Geevarghese. He was the founder of Malankara Catholic Church.

[32] P.T. GHEEVARGHESE, Suriyani Kristhiyanikal Nestoriar ayirunno?, p.23-24.

[33] FR.BERNAD, A brief sketch of the History of the St.Thomas  Christians, ICHC, p.296.

[34] T.K. JOSEPH, The Malabar Christians and their Ancient Documents, Trivandrum, 1929. p.2; WILHEM BAUM, The Church of the East: A concise History, Routledge Curzon, London and New York, 2003. p. 53.

[35] PAUL VARGHESE, ‘The Church in Kerala at the coming of the Portuguese’, The St.Thomas Christian Encyclopaedia of India, Ed. By GEORGE MENACHERY, Vol.2, Trichur, 1973. p. 35.

[36] G. T. MACKENZIE, Christianity in Travancore, ICHC, p. 114.

[37] PHILIP KAITHANAL,  Christianity in Malabar, ICHC, p. 392.

[38] NATHANIEL LARDNER, The works of Nathaniel Lardner, D.D., with a life by Dr. Kippis, ANDREW KIPPIS (Ed.), Vol. V, London, 1838. p.92.

[39] COSMAS INDIOPLEUSTES, Christian Topography, J.W. McCrindle, Forgotten Books, Charleston, 2007. p.98,318.

[40] PETER PERCIVAL, The Land of the Veda: India briefly described in some of its aspects, physical, social, intellectual and Moral, George Bell, London, 1854. p. 377.

[41] JAMES CRAIGIE ROBERTSON, History of the Christian Church, London, 1854. p. 493.

[42] NATHANIEL LARDNER, ‘Cosmas of Alexandria’, The works of Nathaniel Lardner, ANDREW KIPPIS (Ed.), Vol. V, London, 1838. p.92.

[43] ALEXANDER CHALMERS, The General Biographical Dictionary, Vol. XXIII, London, 1815.p.99.

[44] E.M.PHILIP, The Indian Church of St.Thomas, p.77.

[45] SHARON TURNER, The History of the Anglo-Saxons, Vol.II, 6^th Edn., London, 1836. p.161.

[46] HENRY CHARLES LEA, An historical sketch of sacerdotal celibacy in the Christian church, Philadelphia, 1867. p.97.

[47] ARTHUR JOHN MACLEAN, WILLIAM HENRY BROWNE, The Catholicos of the East and His People, Gorgias Press LCC, New Jersey, 2006. p.203.

[48] E.M.PHILIP, The Indian Church of St.Thomas, p.77.

[49] COSMAS INDIOPLEUSTES, Christian Topography, p. 3, 15, 182, 295,336.

[50] MARK I. MIRAVALLE, Introduction to Mary: The Heart of Marian Doctrine and Devotion, Queenship Publishing, Goleta, 1993. p. 53.

[51] WILLIAM PALMER, A Treatise on the Church of Christ, Vol. II, J.G. & F. Rivington, London, 1838. p.180.

[52] Fr. PLACID T.O. C.D., The Syrian Church of Malabar, ICHC, p.367.

[53] JAMES HOUGH, The history of Christianity in India from the commencement of the Christian Era, R.B. Seeley W. Burnside, Vol. 1, London, 1839. p.73-74.

[54] E.M.PHILIP, The Indian Church of St.Thomas, p.79; Cfr. COSMAS INDIOPLEUSTES, Christian Topography, p.98, 318.

[55] J.C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.282.

[56] P.T. GHEEVARGHESE, Suriyani Kristhiyanikal Nestoriar ayirunno?, p.24.

[57] A SYRIAN CATHOLIC, A Synopsis of the history of the Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC,  p. 266.

[58] A SYRIAN CATHOLIC, A Synopsis of the history of the Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.267.

[59] P.T. GHEEVARGHESE, Suriyani Kristhiyanikal Nestoriar ayirunno?, p.26.

[60] E.M.PHILIP, The Indian Church of St.Thomas, p.78-79.

[61] “Contra quum per legitimos traductores perque canonum semitas donum Dei fluxerit fluatque; en plenus est orbis terrarium episcopis, sacerdotibus, et fidelibus, qui tanquam stellae caeli de die in diem augentur. At in vestra regione, ex quo ab eccleciasticis canonibus deficistis, interruptaest ab Indiae populis sacerdotalis succession; nec India solum quae a maritimis regni Persarum finibus usque ad Colon, spatio ducentarum supra mille parasangarum extenditur sed et ipsa Persarum region vestra, divina doctrinae lumine, quod per Espiscopos veritatis reful get, orbata, et in tenebris jacet.”Cfr. JOSEPH SIMONIUS ASSEMANUS, Bibliotheca orientalis, clemantino vaticana, tom4. Rome, 1719-1728. p.27.

[62] JOSEPH C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.281-283.

[63] I. DANIEL, The Syrian Church of Malabar, Haripad, 1945; Reprinted by GEORGE MENACHERY, The Nazranies, The Indian Church History Classics,Vol.1, SARAS, Trissur,1998. p.402.

[64] SAMUEL T ARMSTRONG (Pub.), ‘The Syrian Christians’, Evangelical Exertions in Asia. PMM, No.12, May 1812, Vol. IV, New Series, Boston,1812. p.544.

[65] Dr. CURIAN KANIYANPARAMBIL, The Syrian Orthodox Church in India and its Apostolic Faith, p.26-33.

[66] Fifth century

[67] M. MALTE-BRUN, Universal Geography: Containing the description of India and Oceanica, Vol.3, Wells and Lilly, Boston, 1826. p.207.

[68] G.T. MACKENZIE, Christianity in Travancore, ICHC, p.114.

[69] JOSEPH C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.281-283.

[70] JOSEPH C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.282.

[71] JAMES HOUGH, The history of Christianity in India, Vol.1, London, 1847. p.87; E.M.PHILIP, The Indian Church of St. Thomas, p.75.

[72] From the unpublished treatise addressed to the deacon Rabban Isho. Syriac MS, Mingana, No.12, in Tendel Haris Library, Birmingham, fol. 128b, A. MINGANA, The early spread of Christianity in India, bulletin of the john Rylands library, Manchester, Vol.10, 1926. p. 445.

[73] EUSEBIUS RENAUDOTIUS, Historia Patriarcharum Alexandrinorum Jacobitarum A.D. Marco Usque ad finem Saeculi XIII, Paris, 1713. p.184. (“Paul came after the priestly ordination to one such place called India, to the Patriarch Simon, requesting to be consecrated as a Bishop to the Indians,”)

[74] JEROME LOBO, A Voyage to Abyssinia, SAMUEL JOHNSON (tr.),  Elliot and Kay, London, 1789. p.197.

[75] F. WILFORD, ‘Origin and Decline of the Christian Religion in India’, Asiatic Researches, Vol.10, Asiatic Society Calcutta, London, 1811. p. 80.

[76] BARTHELEMY D’ HERBELOT, ‘Hend U Send & Hind Ve Sind’, Bibliotheque Orientale ou Dictionnaire Universel, eontenant generalement, Tout ce qui regarde la connoissance des Peuples de I’Orient. Leurs Histoires et traditions, Leurs Religions, Sects et Politique, Leurs Sciences et Leurs Arts, Les Vies et Actions Remarquables de tours leurs Saints, Des Jugements critiques, et des extraits de tous leurs ourages, A Maestricht, Chez J.E. DUFOUR & PH.ROUX, Paris, 1776. p.545.

[77] JOHN MANSON NEALE, History of the Holy Eastern Church, The Patriarchate of Alexandria, Vol.2, London,1847.p.88; (In that quotations, Neal added a lot of historian’s writings. That is Severus, Elmacinus, p.68); MICHEL LE QUIEN, Oriens christianus in quatuor patriarchatus digestus, in quo exhibentur Ecclesiae patriarchae caeterique praesules totius Orientis, Vol. II, Paris, 1740. p.454.

[78] FRANCIS DAY, The Land of the Permauls, Or, Cochin, Its Past and Its Present, Printed by Gantz Brothers, Madras, 1863. p.216.

[79] ROBERT MONTGOMERY MARTIN, China; Political, Commercial and Social in an Official Report to her Majesty’s Government, Vol.II, James Madden, London, 1847. p.454.

[80] ISAHAK BAR ARMALTHO, Syrians in Mezrain, 1925. p.23. Cited in  CURIAN KANIYANPARAMBIL, The Syrian Orthodox Church in India and its Apostolic Faith, p.31.

[81] He was a bishop of Coptic Church in 10^th century.

[82] SEVERUS IBN AL-MUKAFFA, History of the Patriarchs of the Coptic Church of Alexandria, III, Agathon to Michael (766), B. EVETTS, PO 5, Paris, 1910. p. 36.

[83] SEVERUS IBN AL-MUKAFFA, History of the Patriarchs of the Coptic Church of Alexandria, III, Agathon to Michael (766), p.30.

[84] J W ETHERIDGE, The Syrian Churches: Their Early History, Liturgies, and Literature, London, 1846. p.156.

[85] RICHARD COLLINS, Missionary Enterprise in the East, London, 1873. p.76. (Collins, a C.M.S. missionary who lived and worked for many years among the Syrian Christians of Malabar)

[86] PETER PERCIVAL, The Land of the Veda: India briefly described in some of its aspects, physical, social, intellectual and Moral, London, 1854. p. 377.

[87] Kottayam Valiya Pally (St. Mary’s Knanaya Church, Kottayam, South India; The Church is situated in about 2 km north of the Kottayam city.)

[88] ARTHUR COKE BURNELL, Elements of south-Indian palaeography, from the fourth to the seventeenth century, A.D.: being an introduction to the study of south-Indian inscriptions and Mss, Stolz & Hirner, Basel Mission Press, 1874. p.45-69; PHILIP KAITHANAL,  Christianity in Malabar, ICHC, p. 392; JUHANON MAR THOMA, Christianity in India and the Mar Thom Syrian Church, ICHC, p.415.

[89] JUHANON MAR THOMA, Christianity in India and the Mar Thom Syrian Church, ICHC, p.415; G. T. MACKENZIE, Christianity in Travancore, ICHC, p.114.

[90] E.W. WEST, Pahlavi Texts of Zoroastrianism, Part1, Vol.5, Oxford University Press, 1880, Revised ed. Forgotten books, Charleston, 2008. p.10.

[91] G.T. MACKENZIE, Christianity in Travancore, ICHC, p.114.

[92] JOSEPH C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.282; G.T. MACKENZIE, Christianity in Travancore, ICHC, p.114.

[93] JOSEPH C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.282.

[94] PHILIP KAITHANAL, Christianity in Malabar, ICHC, p.392.

[95] JOSEPH C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.282.

[96] E.M.PHILIP, The Indian Church of St. Thomas, p.114-115.

[97] P.T. GHEEVARGHESE, Suriyani Kristhiyanikal Nestoriar ayirunno, p.36.

[98] JOSEPH C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.282-283.

[99] JOOHANON MAR THOMA, Christianity in India and the Mar Thoma Syrian Church, ICHC, p. 414-415; PHILIP KAITHANAL,  Christianity in Malabar, ICHC, p.392.

[100] JOSEPH C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.282

[101] GEORGE PERCY BADGER, Nestorians and Rituals, Vol.2, London, 1852. p. 14.

[102] JOSEPH C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.283; Cfr. ARTHUR COKE BURNELL, Indian antiquary, Vol.III, Dr. BURGESS C.I.E., (Ed.) November, London, 1874. p. 311-314.

[103] JOSEPH C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.283.

[104] BENEDICT VADAKKEKARA, Origin of India’s St.Thomas Christians- A Historiographical Critique, Media House, Delhi, 1995. p.408.

[105] XAVIER KOODAPUZHA, Christianity in India, OIRSI,Vadavathoor, 1998. p.62.

[106] E.M.PHILIP, The Indian Church of St. Thomas, p.116.

[107] E.P. MATHEW, ‘The Knanaya Community of Kerala’ St. Thomas Christians Encyclopedia of India, Edited by GEORGE MENACHERY, Vol.2, Trichur, 1973.  p.75.

[108] I. DANIEL, The Syrian Church of Malabar, ICHC, p. 403.

[109] P.T. GHEEVARGHESE, Suriyani Kristhiyanikal Nestoriar ayirunno, p.40-41.

[110] JOOHANON MAR THOMA, Christianity in India and the Mar Thom Syrian Church, ICHC, p. 414.

[111] The two Bishops commonly named as Mor Sabor and Mor Afroth. The different accounts of historians used this names like Xaor and Aproito, Apreto and Thor,  Xabro and Aprott, Saper and Aprot, Saper and Parut, Sapor and Proth, Sabore and Afroth etc.. Cfr. A. M. MUNDADAN, History of Christianity in India, Vol.1,Theological Publications of India, Banglore, 1984.p.103. The Synod of Diamper called them as Marxobro and Marphrod in the decrees. Cfr. MICHAEL GEDDES, The History of Malabar Church, London, By Sam,Smith, Benj.Walford, London, 1694. p.368-371.

[112] Kollam (known to the Portuguese as Quilon, pronounced koy-lon) is a city in Kollam district in the Indian state of Kerala.

[113] JAMES HOUGH, The History of Christianity in India, Vol. II, London, 1839. p. 106-107.

[114] JAMES HOUGH, Christianity in India from the commencement of the Christian Era, Vol.II, R.B. Seeley, London, 1839. p. 659.

[115] MICHAEL GEDDES, The History of Malabar Church, p.368-371.

[116] GEORGE BROADLEY HOWARD, The Christians of St. Thomas and Their Liturgies, James Parker, London, 1864. p.19; JAMES BRYCE, A Sketch of Native Education in India, under the superintendence of the Church of Scotland, William Black Wood and Sons, Edinburgh, 1839. p. 205.

[117] Fr. K.T. ZAKARIA, Malankara Sabhayum Antiochya Simhasanavum, Kottayam, 1973. p.41.

[118] Thirusabha Charithram, (Mal.) ’History of holy Church.

[119] M.V. PAUL, Thirusabha Charitram, Trissur, 1950. p.206-222.

[120] XAVIER KOODAPUZHA, Bharathara Sabha Charithram,(Mal.), III Edn., OIRS, Vadavathoor, 1998. 146-147.

[121] JOSEPH C. PANJIKARAN, The Syrian Church in Malabar, ICHC, p.283.

[122] JOSEPH SIMONIUS ASSEMANUS, Bibliotheca orientalis, clemantino vaticana, tom.III, Part II, Romae,1728. p.442-444;  P.T. GHEEVARGHESE, Suriyani Kristhiyanikal Nestoriar ayirunno? p.49; E.M.PHILIP, The Indian Church of St.Thomas, p. 85; I. DANIEL, The Syrian Church of Malabar, ICHC, p. 403.

[123] P.T. GHEEVARGHESE, Suriyani Kristhiyanikal Nestoriar ayirunno, p.49.

[124] Fr. PLACID T.O.C.D., The Syrian Church of Malabar, ICHC, p.367.

[125] C.V. CHERIAN, A History of Christianity in Kerala, Kottayam, 1973. p.112.

[126] ELDHO VARGHESE, Mar Sapor and Mar Proth: A study of their tradition and significance in the history of Church in India, (Thesis), Malankara Syrian Orthodox Theological Seminary, Mulanthuruthy, 2005. p.62-83.

[127] Mr. BAILEY, ‘Brief History of the Syrians of Malabar’, AJ, March, 1820, Asiatic Journal and Monthly Register for British India and its Dependencies, Vol. IX. January to June, Black, Kingsbury, Parbury & Allen, London, 1820. p.250.

[128] P.T. GHEEVARGHESE, Suriyani Kristhiyanikal Nestoriar ayirunno, p.49-50.

[129]BERNARD THOMA ALENCHERY, Mar Thoma Kristianikal, 2^nd Edn., Kottayam, 1992. p.260.

[130] I. DANIEL, The Syrian Church of Malabar, ICHC, p. 403.

[131] E.M. PHILIP, The Indian Church of St.Thomas, p.115-116.

[132] Dr. CURIAN KANIYANPARAMBIL, The Syrian Orthodox Church in India and its Apostolic Faith, p.37.

[133] JAMES HOUGH, The History of Christianity in India, Vol.I, London, 1847.  p.84, 116.

[134] “Demonstrationis bistoriae ecclesiasticae monumentis comprobatae, Francisci Blanchini, Romae 1752., et Renaudot lib. Cit. pag. 267., qui ex Nilo Doxopatrio apud Allatium lib. I. cap. 9. pag. 166.” P. PAULINO A S. BARTHOLOMAEO, India Orientalis Christiana, Romae, 1794. p. 94.