Given the Iranian character of the traditions about the North and the large measure of independence allowed to the Northern élite, it might seem easy to dismiss summarily the idea of an “Umayyad” or an “ʿAbbāsid” North by arguing that caliphal rule was not consistently tied to a specific dynasty. On the one hand, the Caliphate went through periods of decentralization that, compounded with the deeply rooted system of hierarchical power in the North, meant that there were certainly moments when Armenia and Albania had at best a tenuous tie to Damascus or Baghdad. That said, there is concurrently considerable evidence to suggest that both the Umayyad and the ʿAbbāsid caliphs expected to exert direct control over the provinces, especially given the provinces’ status as frontiers. Thus the “Umayyad” quality of the Umayyad North is easily demonstrated with the elevation of Maslama b. ʿAbd al-Malik, Muḥammad b. Marwān, and Marwān b. Muḥammad as governors of the North. These governors were not only renowned warriors, but also sons of Umayyad caliphs. The ʿAbbāsids followed suit, as future caliphs such as Abū Jaʿfar Manṣūr and Hārūn al-Rashīd served as governors of the North before coming to power.

The goal of this chapter is to examine what we mean by caliphal “rule” in the decentralized North. In particular, it considers whether there are direct ties between how the Sasanian shāhanshāhs and the Umayyad and ʿAbbāsid caliphs engaged with and exerted control over the local populations across three main strata: the masses, the political élite, and the religious élite. A. Ter-Łevondyan, whose many works remain even today the most reliable studies of Arab–Armenian relations under the ʿAbbāsid Caliphate, notes that