The Turco-Mongol Invasions and the Lords of Armenia in the 13 ...

..cOur own analysis justifies [Zorenac'i's
interpretation since it too has shown that the
naxarar system did in fact consist first of native
[i.,e. dynastic] and later of foreign [i.e.. Arsacid]
elements. The fundamental difference lies in the
fact that according to Zorenac i, the great naxarardoos
were descended from single individuals,"while
in our analysis they were derived from previously
Independent ethnic groups.
It is evident from the examples just cited that
for Zorenac'i two qualities were the bases of naxarar
status: service and nobility, i.£.» superiority of
blood... In Zorenac'i*s opinion, the aristocracy
consisted of the more ancient families, primarily
those presumably descended from Hayk, which were
already present in Armenia at the time of the coming
of the Arsacids. According to us, the aristocracy
consisted of the houses which had developed through
the disintegration of tribal relationships.
For Zorenac'i as for us, land tenure also
provided the material basis of the naxarar system.
Promotion to the rank of naxarar according to hlo
was nothing more than a grant of" lands. Nobility
and naxarar status were synonymous concepts for
him for the very reason that all nobles possessed
lands, and lands were granted in hereditary tenure, n.
We maintain that for the early 13th century, both Adontz
and Zorenac'i were correct. Zak'are came very close to
Zorenac'i's first Arsacid king, "ValarSak" in establishing
a regime. In a sense, he generated new families through
association with his own. But curiously, the tendency
toward convergence—mecatuns investing in land, and the
remnants of the few ancient dynastic families diversifying
into trade—coupled with that strong hereditarizing
Adontz, pp. 369-70.
245