The paper focuses on the so-called History of the Patriarchs of the East, transmitted in the encyclopedic work Kitāb al-Majdal by ʿAmr ibn Maṭṭā. While the original compilation dates to the early 11th century, it was updated through subsequent redactions up to the mid-12th century. Spanning the period from the apostolic origins of the Church to the era of Seljuq rule, the History of the Patriarchs provides an invaluable source for understanding the institutional interactions between the caliphal court and the Church of the East.

The image this source projects at the heart of Islamic political power is marked by notable ambiguities. While the caliphs and the de facto rulers of the Buyid and Seljuq periods are generally depicted in positive terms—as protectors of Christianity—the portrayal of other influential court figures, particularly Christian physicians, is considerably more negative. They are often presented as sources of conflict and as challengers to the authority of the Catholicoi.

Building on these observations, the paper seeks to explore how this historiographical text constructs an ideal discourse of political authority in order to legitimize the Catholicate as the sole Christian interlocutor with Islamic power. As I aim to demonstrate, the History of the Patriarchs pursues this goal by drawing on Roman history—especially the story of Constantine—and on the canonical tradition established by the early councils, a tradition that continued within the canonical heritage of the Church of the East.