By ARAM RAFFI
The country that is called Armenia consists of a large
plateau, covered with numerous mountain ranges, which are intersected
by many valleys and passes, as well as by rivers and lesser streams of
considerable depth. The climate differs in various parts of the
country, the meteorological conditions ranging from frost and snow to
extreme heat. Over the plains towers Mount Ararat, on which, as we read
in the Bible, the Ark rested after the Flood. Here also is the
traditional site of the Garden of Eden, and the four rivers mentioned
in Genesis as rising in the Garden still flow through the Armenian
land.
The origin of the Armenian people is enveloped in
mystery, but it is an established fact that Armenia has had a
civilisation of its own from a very early date, and that the Armenians
are one of the most ancient races in the world. They have had their
periods of independence, but, on account of its geographical position,
Armenia has seldom figured as one of the great ruling states of the
world, although it has repelled by arms invasions of such nations as
Assyria. Assyrian records are filled with descriptions of conflicts
with Armenian kings; King Assur Nazir Haban (1882–1857
B.C.) gives this account of one of his
“victories”:—“They (the people of Ararat, or
Urardu) fled to the impregnable mountains so that I might not be able
to get at them, for the mighty summits were like drawn swords pointing
to the skies. Only the birds of heaven soaring on their wings could
reach them. In three days I was there, spreading terror in places where
they had taken refuge. Their corpses, like autumn leaves, filled the
clefts. The rest escaped to distant inaccessible heights.”
Notwithstanding the boasts of the Assyrian kings, they
did not succeed in permanently crushing the independence of
Armenia.
Tigranes the Great brought Armenia more in contact with
distant foreign lands. In his time his country began to be considered
of importance by Greek and Roman historians. The Romans sent Lucullus
to engage in war with Tigranes in order to crush his growing power.
This is what—according to Plutarch—Lucullus said of
Tigranes:—
“In Armenia Tigranes, King of Kings, is seated,
surrounded with that power which [164]has
wrested Asia from the Parthians, which carries Grecian colonies into
Media, subdues Syria and Palestine, cuts off the Seleucidae and carries
their wives and daughters into captivity.” Cicero says of
Tigranes the Great:—“He made the Republic of Rome tremble
before the prowess of his arms.”
To give even a short outline of Armenian folklore and
poetry it is essential to point out those agencies and influences which
have served to originate that literature. Hence its literature and
history, like those of all countries, are interwoven. Notwithstanding
its periods of greatness, Armenia was unable, as we said above, to
continue to be a powerful and independent state. Thus we see Armenia
serving as a bridge between armies engaged in war, and such has been
its fate in all periods, even up to the present time.
It fell successively under the dominion of Assyria,
Babylonia, and, finally, of Persia when, after the time of Cyrus, the
kingdom of Persia was extended by Darius over nearly the whole of Asia.
Although Armenia became a tributary of Persia, it still had its own
independent king.
The Median Empire had been founded probably in
677–672 B.C. From that time Iranian
influence was strongly felt in the politics, language, and social
organisation of Armenia, and the Iranian religion, with its
terminology, names of divinities, and many folk-beliefs, permeated
Armenian paganism.
Moreover, the Armenians, being the near neighbours of
the Persians, closely resembled them in their manner of life and their
religion. After the conquest of Alexander the Great, Armenia, like all
other Asiatic nations, fell under Greek dominion. Then the Macedonian
rule gave way to the Parthian, and the dynasty of the Arsacidae held
sway, a king of that race being set over Armenia and founding an
independent Armenian dynasty. The Arsacidae introduced Greek
civilisation and culture into Armenia. During this period the character
of the Armenians changed. Not only their religion but their manners and
customs became different from those of the Persians. The rule of
Macedonia over Armenia lasted 180 years (330–150 B.C.). The Graecophile Arsacid dynasty lasted 376 years
(150 B.C.-226 A.D.).
These long periods brought the Armenians into close contact with the
Greeks and separated them from the Persians.
To the periods which we have outlined belongs the
literature of Armenia preceding the introduction of Christianity. Of
this literature the remains that have come down to us consist of
legends, songs, and fragments of epics. Of the epics we have some
records and summaries, chiefly found in the History of Moses of Khorene
(5th century A.D.), who has also preserved some
of the heroic songs in their original form. These epics relate the
history of Armenian [165]ancestral and mythical
heroes, to whom are ascribed the foundation and development of the
Armenian nation. In them we see Armenian ideals of the earliest times.
As these ideals are closely interwoven with the religious beliefs of
the pre-Christian period, let us now cast a glance at Armenian
Paganism.
It is said by ancient Armenian historians that the
Armenians were originally worshippers of the One True God, but they,
like all other nations, deserted Him and took up with various
religions. Sun-worship was one of these; Zoroastrianism also had its
turn; in due course, the Greeks introduced their own deities; even
India succeeded in making its influence felt. Strabo has it that the
Armenians, during the period of the Arsacid dynasty, were of the same
religion as the Parthians. It appears that the Armenians fused together
Zoroastrianism and the polytheism of Greece and other nations, thus
combining eastern and western religion. One result of this fusion was
that though the Zoroastrians made no visible representation of their
God, the temples of Armenia were full of images, brought from
Mesopotamia, Asia Minor, and Greece.
The principal god of Armenia was Aramazd, whom
the Armenians called “the Architect of the Universe, Creator of
Heaven and Earth.” He was also the father of the other gods. The
Armenians annually celebrated the festival of this god on the 1st day
of Navasard,1 when they sacrificed white animals of various
kinds—goats, horses, mules, with whose blood they filled goblets
of gold and silver. The most prominent sanctuaries of Aramazd were in
the ancient city of Ani in Daranali, the burial-place of the Armenian
kings, as well as in the village of Bagavan in Bagravand.2
Aramazd had an attendant incorporeal spirit, named
Tir or Grogh (“writer”), whom he sent to
earth to watch men and record in a book their good and evil deeds.
After death, human souls were conducted by Tir to Aramazd, who opened
the book at each soul’s record, in accordance with which he
assigned a reward or punishment. In a village near Vargharshapat there
was a temple of this god, where the priests interpreted dreams after
consulting his oracle. The influence of Tir was great in Armenia, for
he was a personification of hope and fear. There are traces of the cult
of this god in the Armenian language. It is still usual to hear, used
as a curse, the expression, “May Grogh take you!” The son
of Aramazd was Mihr, Fire. He guided the heroes in battle and
conferred wreaths on the victors. The word mehian
(“temple”) is derived from Mihr; also some Christian names.
One of the months in the ancient Armenian calendar (Mehekan) was named
after him. His commemoration-day was celebrated with [166]great splendour at the beginning of spring.
Fires were kindled in the open market-place in his honour, and a
lantern lighted from one of these fires was kept burning in his temple
throughout the year. This custom of kindling fires in the spring is
still observed in some parts of Armenia.3
Although the Persians and the Armenians were both
worshippers of Mihr, the conceptions and observances of the two nations
differed. The Armenian sacred fire was invisible, but the Persian was
material and was kept up in all the temples. For this reason the
Armenians called the Persians fire-worshippers. But the Armenians had
also a visible fire-god, who, although material, was
intangible—the sun—to which many temples were dedicated and
after which one of the months (Areg) was named.
Long after the introduction of Christianity, there was a
sect of sun-worshippers existent in Armenia, who were called
“Children of the Sun.” A small remnant of them is still
supposed to be found, dwelling between the Tigris and the Euphrates.
Traces of sun-worship are also evident in the Armenian language and in
the Armenian literature of Christian times. Some sayings and phrases
are still in use which contain references to sun-worship, such as the
expression of endearment, “Let me die for your sun!” and
the oath, “Let the sun of my son be witness.”
One of the most famous Armenian goddesses was
Anahit, who answered to the Greek Artemis and the Roman Diana.
She was a “pure and spotless goddess,” and, as a daughter
of Aramazd, was “mother of chastity,” as well as the
benefactress of the whole human race; “through her the Armenian
land exists, from her it draws its life; she is the glory of our nation
and its protectress”4; and for her the ancient
Armenians felt intense love and adoration.
Many images and shrines were dedicated to her under the
names of “the Golden Mother,”5 “the
Being of Golden Birth,” etc. Every summer there was a festival in
her honour. On that day, a dove and a rose were offered to her golden
image, whence the day was called Vardavar, which means
“the flaming of the Rose.” On the introduction of
Christianity, the temple of Anahit was destroyed and her festival
became the Feast of the Transfiguration of Christ; it falls in the last
days of the year according to the ancient Armenian calendar; but the
name “Vardavar” still remains and doves are still set
flying on that day. This is also [167]the
Armenian “water-day,” during which the people amuse
themselves throwing water at each other.6
Anahit was sought also in cases of great sickness.
The sister of Anahit was Astghik,7
the goddess of beauty, a personification of the moon, corresponding to
the Phoenician and Sidonian Astarte. Strange to say, the Persians had
no goddess of beauty, but the bright sky of Armenia, its numerous
valleys, the torrents running down from snow-capped mountains, the
lakes, the cultivated fields and meadows tended to strengthen the sense
of beauty, and, therefore, Armenia had a goddess of beauty, who was not
to be found in the pantheon of the neighbouring country.
The Armenians assigned Astghik a husband worthy of her.
He was Vahagn, deified on account of his valour. In ancient songs, he
is credited with a miraculous birth. The fires of heaven and earth, and
the sea crimson in the light of dawn, travailed to bring him into
being.8 As we shall see later, Moses of Khorene has
preserved portions of these songs. Vahagn was called Vishapakagh
(Uprooter of dragons), as he cleared the Armenian land of monsters and
saved it from evil influences. His exploits were known not only in
Armenia, but in the abode of the gods. Having stolen corn from the
barns of King Barsham of Assyria, he ran away and tried to hide himself
in heaven. From the ears he dropped arose the Milky Way, which is
called in Armenia the Track of the Corn-stealer.
The third daughter of Aramazd was Nané or
Nooné. She was the goddess of contrivance. It was
believed by the Armenians that contrivance was a necessary power for a
woman, because, in the management of the household, she had to make big
things out of small ones, and circumstances were already against her on
account of the vicissitudes which Armenia was constantly
undergoing.
Sandaramet, the wife of Aramazd, was an invisible
goddess and a personification of the earth. Aramazd sent rain upon her,
which brought forth the vegetation on the earth. She came to be a
synonym of Hades and was very frequently referred to as such in
theological books and in the hymnary of the Christian Church.
Besides these gods of their own, the Armenians also
adopted alien divinities. When [168]Tigranes brought a
number of Phoenicians to Armenia as prisoners, they brought with them
their god Ammon, from whose name comes the word
Ammonor,9 “the day of Ammon”—the New
Year. Assyrian, Arab, and other emigrations also led to the
introduction of foreign deities. An Armenian king, when he brought home
captives, also introduced the gods of those captives, whose images were
placed in the temples beside those of the native gods that they most
closely resembled. Even Indian fugitives brought the brother-gods,
Demetr and Gisanes, whose images were not like those of the other gods
of Armenia, for the images of the gods of Armenia are, as a rule,
small, whereas these were very tall, with long black hair and black
faces. There was also a great immigration of Jews into Armenia, and
this influenced the Armenians in the direction of monotheism. Besides
the principal gods, there were also secondary ones. These were spirits,
corresponding to angels, who acted as guardians to different classes of
natural objects:—Kadjk,10 who
occupied the mountains; Parik, who presided over flocks; and
many others.
Water was honoured in Armenia as a masculine principle.
According to Tacitus (Annals, vi. 37) the Armenians offered
horses as sacrifices to the Euphrates, and divined by its waves and
foam. Sacred cities were built around the river Araxes and its
tributaries. Even now there are many sacred springs with healing
powers, and the people always feel a certain veneration towards waters
in motion.
There were gods who lived in the waters and destroyed
harmful monsters of the deep. There was also a god who breathed out a
mysterious atmosphere which destroyed malignant creatures. One wonders
whether this is a foreshadowing of the fear of microbes. All the gods
of this class were friendly to agriculturists.
There were also “Haurot-Maurot,” the
name of a flower (hyacinthus racemosus Dodonei) first mentioned
by Agathangelos. The Arabs incorporated them in the Quran (ii. 96) as
two angels sent down to live in Babel in human circumstances.
Alk, who dwelt in the waters, was a very harmful
devil. He used to live in the corners of houses and stables, and in
damp places. He had eyes of fire, nails of copper, teeth of iron, and
the jaws of a wild boar. He carried a sword of iron in his hand and was
a bitter enemy to pregnant women, near whom he sat at the time their
child was born.
There were nymphs, who were guardians of women. They
wandered through gardens and amid streams, but were invisible. They
attended weddings and frequented bathrooms and the women’s
quarters in general. These nymphs and spirits were innumerable.
[169]Every woman was supposed to have a guardian
nymph. The nymphs were supposed by some to be immortal and endowed with
perpetual youth; others described them as mortal though they never grew
old. There was also a group of male spirits who were regarded by some
as mortal, by others as immortal. They wandered with the nymphs through
forests, gardens, and other open places. They were imagined as very
tall, with features like those of men; some were half-man and
half-animal. Some were called Parik, “dancers”;
others Hushka parik, “dancers to a melody in a minor
key.”
In some places, even now, a belief in these nymphs (or
fairies) survives. Many stories are told of their beauty, their
marvellous dancing, and their wondrous music. They are never called by
the name of “nymphs,” but are spoken of by the people of
the country as “our betters.” Still in some parts of
Armenia, in May and October, a festival is held annually in honour of
them, generally by the women in the Public Baths. They assemble early
in the morning and remain till late at night, dancing, eating, and
bathing.
Before the people thought of building temples, they
worshipped their gods in forests and on mountains. One of these forests
was the Forest of Sos. According to tradition the son of Ara the
Beautiful, Anushavan, who devoted himself to the worship of this sacred
place, was called, after the forest, Sos. The priests derived oracles
from the rustling of the leaves in this holy wood.
Besides temples, which were numerous in Armenia, there
were, all over the country, altars and shrines, as well as images and
pictures.
To sum up, the pre-Christian religion of Armenia was at
first a kind of nature-worship, which developed into polytheism. There
were two elements in Armenian religion, the native and the foreign.
Besides nature-worship, there was a recognition, among
the Armenians, of the Good and Evil Spirit, but predominance was given
to the former. It is curious that, in the Armenian pantheon, there is
no god of evil, and Armenian epic heroes are always described as
fighting against evil spirits.
In Armenian epics, the immortals stand in the
background, the most prominent place being assigned to legendary
heroes, to whom poets attribute divine descent, thus tracing the origin
of the Armenian race to the gods. Unfortunately, the greater part of
these epics is lost, though a few fragments are preserved, in their
original shape, by Moses of Khorene.
The following is one of these fragments, which gives the
general conception of the gods and the heroes descended from
them:—
“Glorious and awful were the former gods. They
were the cause of the greatest blessings [170]of the
earth; also of the beginning of the world and the generations of men.
From them arose a race of giants, with great limbs, fantastical, of
stupendous stature, who, in their arrogance, conceived the impious idea
of tower-building. But by the wrath of the gods, a mighty wind arose,
overthrowing and shattering the structure. The speech of men was
confused; there was general bewilderment.”
Among the giants mentioned in this passage was Haik, the
brave and illustrious chief—a famous archer, who is the
patronymic hero of Armenia, and is described by Moses of Khorene as
having curly hair and being beautiful to look upon, with brawny arms,
well-set shoulders, and fiery eyes. Recoiling from submission to Belus,
he, with his followers, went northwards to the foot of a mountain,
where they took up their abode. Belus sent emissaries to him, bearing
the following message:—
“Thou hast departed and hast settled in a chill
and frosty region. Soften thy hard pride, change thy coldness to
geniality; be my subject, and come and live a life of ease in my
domain. Thus shalt thou find pleasure.”
Haik’s answer was to prepare for combat. The
fights between Haik and Belus are minutely recounted. The dress of the
two champions, their looks, their weapons, are all described in detail.
At last Belus was vanquished and slain by his adversary.
Before the time of Moses of Khorene, Haik was known as a
great hunter like the Greek Orion. In the passages in Job and Isaiah
where “Orion” appears in the English Bible as the name of a
constellation, “Haik” appears in the Armenian version.
The country that Haik conquered was named Hayastan,
after him.
He was succeeded by Armenak, who extended the boundaries
of his kingdom. This expansion is thus described by Moses of
Khorene:—
“Armenak, taking with him all his host, goes to
the north-east. He descends on a plain surrounded by high mountains,
through which, from the west, murmuring streams flow. The plain extends
towards the east. From the foot of the mountains gush springs no less
limpid, mingling together to form little rivers, which, with gentle
flow, run round the edge of the plain, parallel to the base of the
mountains.
“But the southern mountain, with its white peak,
at first rises straight up; afterwards it curves, looking beside the
other heights like a hoary stooping elder amid youths.”
Armenak was succeeded by Aramais. This king took up his
abode on a hill beside a river, where he built a town which he named
Aramavir. The river he called by the name of his grandson, Araxes. He
had a son, named Shara, who was a glutton and had an immense number of
children. He sent him to a very fertile place which was called, after
him, Shirak. [171]Moses of Khorene quotes a proverb
relating to Shara:—“If thou hast the gullet of a Shara, our
stores are not the stores of a Shirak.”
Shara had a son, Amasa. After him Mount Ararat was named
“Masis.”
Moses of Khorene mentions another descendant of Haik,
whose name was Tork. He was ugly and of tremendous strength. He was
able to break great stones with his hands. Once, when he was on the
shore of the Sea of Pontus, he hurled huge rocks at the ships of his
enemies and sank them. This incident reminds us of the Cyclops
Polyphemus, in the Odyssey. Tork had also artistic proclivities.
After dividing large stones with his hands, he smoothed them with his
nails, and with his nails covered them with drawings of eagles and
other pictures.11
Then the historian gives a table of royal names down to
Aram, whom he describes as industrious and patriotic, and who said that
he would rather die for his fatherland than endure the sight of
strangers devastating it. He collected an army of 50,000 and drove the
foreign invaders out of Armenia. Epic poems, according to Moses of
Khorene, praise Aram’s valour in his conflicts with Barsham, King
of Assyria, whom he eventually subdued. He was succeeded by Ara the
Beautiful.
The romantic love of Semiramis for this king, which was
a favourite theme of ancient Armenian song and epic, is elaborately
recounted by Moses of Khorene. A translation of his narrative is given
on page 23 of this volume. There are several variants of this story,
which is still related in Armenia, and the names of many places as well
as many superstitions can be traced to it.
Semiramis invited Ara to Nineveh to be her husband,
promising him the half of the kingdom, but Ara refused her offer,
having a wife already. Semiramis thereupon sent an army against Ara,
with orders to capture the king alive and bring him to her; but,
instead of the living king, they brought his corpse. Semiramis, who, as
is well known, was wont to practise magic, laid the body on a certain
high place, in order that the gods might descend and restore it to life
by licking the wounds. This height is still called Lezk, and in
former times others used it for the same purpose as Semiramis. The idea
of this mode of cure probably originated from the fact that wounded
men, lying unconscious on the battlefield, have often been revived by
the licking of dogs and other animals.
In Moses of Khorene we find this story about the
childhood of Sanatruk. One day, he, under the care of his mother and
his nurse, was walking among the mountains of Kordua, when suddenly a
high wind arose, accompanied by a snowstorm, and separated the mother
[172]from her son. For three days and nights the
nurse and the child were buried in the snow, but the gods sent a
miraculous white animal which rescued them and brought them home
alive.12
But, though such legends as these may have some
foundation in fact, there are others that are entirely fabulous, like
the following, which is related by Moses of Khorene:—
The heir to the principality of Ardzruni, when a boy,
fell asleep in the open air. A storm of rain came on and drenched him;
and then the hot sun shone down and scorched him with its rays;
whereupon an eagle flew up and hovered over his head with outspread
wings, sheltering him from the assaults of nature.
In the fourth century A.D., we
find a similar story told of Prince Mushegh Mamikonian. After his death
his relatives put his body on a high tower, believing that the spirits
would descend and restore him to life. This story is found in Faustus
Byzand (A.D. 337–384).
The animals figuring in such stories as these are not
represented as merely adjuncts to man, but as independent individuals
who act in accordance with their own characters and inclinations.
Plato, in his Republic, gives a slightly different version of
the legend of Ara. Er was an Armenian (or, as some commentators say,
“The son of Armenios”), a native of Pamphylia. He was slain
in battle, and ten days afterwards, when the bodies of the dead were
taken up, already in a state of corruption, his body was found
unaffected by decay and carried away home to be buried. And on the
twelfth day, as he was lying on the funeral pile, he returned to life
and told them what he had seen in the other world.
The name “Er” is evidently a variant of Ara.
The story, as told by Plato, has all the features of a transplanted
legend.
Moses of Khorene says that, after the death of Ara the
Beautiful, Semiramis passed the rest of her days in Armenia, which
place she greatly loved. Here she established the city of Van. A
picturesque account of its foundation given by the historian is
included in this volume (page 33).
The following account is given of the end of
Semiramis:—
Being pursued by her enemies, she ran away on foot, and,
becoming thirsty, she stopped to drink water from the Lake of Van. Here
she was overtaken by the “swordsmen,” whereupon, after
taking off her magic bracelet and throwing it into the lake, she
herself was turned into stone. [173]
With regard to the bracelet of Semiramis, the following
story is even now commonly told in the neighbourhood of Van:—
Once Semiramis saw a bracelet in the hands of some
little boys, who had found it in the river, and were examining it with
curiosity. Semiramis, knowing that the bracelet had magic powers, took
it away from the children. By means of this jewel, she allured youths
to their destruction. This licentiousness brought her into general
disfavour. An old man, at last, snatched the bracelet from her and ran
with it towards the sea. Semiramis rushed after him in a fury, but, not
being able to come up with him, she let down her long hair and used it
as a sling to hurl a great rock at him. The weight of the rock pulled
out her hair. The rock itself fell into a ditch near Artamet.
Semiramis, through fear and amazement, was turned into stone. The old
man threw the bracelet into the Lake of Van. Even now a rock is shown
at Artamet which bears the name of “the Rock of
Semiramis.”
Then Moses of Khorene speaks of Tigranes I., who,
in conjunction with Cyrus, put an end to the kingdom of Media. The
epics say of Tigranes that “his face was of lovely hue, his eyes
were soft and lustrous, his shoulders stalwart, the calves of his legs
were well-shaped, he was altogether fair to look upon; in food and
drink he was moderate; he was of lofty mind, eloquent in speech, and
masterly in the conduct of affairs. Just and equitable, he weighed each
man’s acts in the scale of his mind. He was not jealous of the
great nor did he despise men of low estate, but spread the mantle of
his care over all men alike. He increased our treasures of gold,
silver, and precious stones. Under him, men and women wore fine
garments, of divers colours, richly embroidered, which made the
ill-favoured to look fair and the beautiful to look like demi-gods.
“Tigranes, the bringer of peace and prosperity,
caused all men to grow fat with butter and honey. In his day, the
infantry became cavalry, slingers became skilful archers,
dagger-bearers were equipped with swords, and naked soldiers were
provided with shields and armour.”
The historian adds that the splendour of the arms and
equipments was enough of itself to drive back the enemy.
As the head of a band of warriors, he performed many
valorous deeds:—“We were under the yoke of others, but he
put other nations under our yoke and made them our
tributaries.”
His rival, Astyages, King of Media, was always
suspicious and distrustful of him.
One night Astyages had a terrible dream. The next
morning he summoned his courtiers. They found him sighing, looking on
the ground with gloomy mien, and heaving groans from the depths of his
heart. “When the courtiers inquired the reason of his
behaviour” (continues [174]the historian)
“the king remained silent for hours, then in a sad voice he
related his dream, which was as follows:—
“‘To-day I was in an unknown country, close
to a mountain, which rose very high above the ground; its summit was
covered with ice. It seemed to me to be in Armenia. After I had gazed
for a long time, it appeared to me that there was a woman sitting on
the summit. Her garments were purple. Her face was covered by a blue
veil. Her eyes were beautiful. She was tall, with rosy cheeks. She was
in travail, and for a long time I looked on her with admiration, then I
beheld her give birth to three heroes, all of equal stature: the first,
sitting on a lion, soared towards the west; the second, seated on a
leopard, went towards the north; the third, bridling a huge dragon,
defiantly attacked our kingdom. In these confused dreams, I seemed to
be standing on the roof of my palace, and the covering of my chambers
was adorned with beautiful fountains of variegated colours. The gods
that had crowned me were standing there, with wondrous faces, and I,
with you, was honouring them with incense and sacrifice. Suddenly
looking up, I saw the man who was seated on the dragon wing his course
in our direction, desiring to overthrow our gods. I advanced to the
attack and engaged in fight with that youthful hero. First of all, with
lances we pierced each other’s bodies, calling forth rivers of
blood, and past our sunlit palace flowed a crimson sea. For hours we
fought also with other arms. But, to be brief, the fight ended in my
defeat. I was bathed in sweat, sleep forsook me, and ever since I have
felt as if I had no life in me. For all these visions signify that the
Armenian king, Tigranes, is about to attack us. And whosoever amongst
you, by counsel or deeds, wishes to aid me, and aspires to the honour
of being a king, equal to myself, let him speak.’”
Then the story goes on to tell how Astyages, in order to
prevent Tigranes from making war on him, proposed that his
rival’s sister, Tigranuhi, should be his wife; therefore
Astyages sent to Tigranes one of his councillors with a letter
accompanied by many precious gifts. Moses of Khorene gives the letter,
which runs as follows:—
“Thou knowest, beloved brother, that of all the
gifts of the gods to us none is more precious than the multitude of our
dear ones, especially when they are wise and valiant. The reason of
this is that, in such case, quarrels will not arise from outside, and
if they arise, they will be unable to make their way within and will
disperse themselves. Having seen the great advantage of such
relationships, it has entered my mind to confirm and strengthen the
love that is between us, so that, both of us being secured on all
sides, we may be able to carry on the affairs of our kingdom in greater
safety. All this will be ensured, if thou wilt give me to wife thy
sister Tigranuhi, the Great Lady of Armenia. I hope that thou wilt look
favourably [175]on this proposal, that she may be the
Queen of Queens. Mayest thou have a long life, fellow sovereign and
dear brother.”
We have presented this letter as a matter of curiosity,
because in none of the early European epics are there texts of letters.
This usage is characteristically oriental. In Isaiah we read of the
letter of Sennacherib to Hezekiah; there is also a letter in the
Persian Firdusi’s Shah-nameh.
After his marriage with Tigranuhi, Astyages tried to set
her at enmity with her brother, and once he contrived cunningly to
entice Tigranes to become his guest in order that he might slay him.
But his wife perceived his treachery and secretly sent a message to her
brother. Tigranes accepted the invitation of Astyages, but came
accompanied by a great army. He postponed his attack till his sister
had made her escape. In the battle which ensued, Astyages was
killed.
Of this Tigranes, Xenophon says a great deal in his
Cyropaedia, from which we cite the following
incident:—
The Armenian king having revolted against Cyrus, the
latter invaded Armenia and conquered him. Cyrus intended to deal very
severely with the rebel monarch, but Tigranes, the son of the Armenian
king, persuaded him to be more lenient. Xenophon gives a long
conversation, discussing the terms of peace, in the course of which
Cyrus asked Tigranes, who was newly married and greatly loved his wife,
what he would give to regain her freedom, she having fallen into the
hands of the victor, together with the other women of the royal family.
“Cyrus,” was the Prince’s reply, “to save her
from servitude, I would lay down my life.”
On which Cyrus replied: “Take, then, thine own,
for I cannot reckon that she is properly our captive, for thou didst
never flee from us.” Then, turning to the king, he added:
“And thou, Armenian, take thy wife and children, without paying
anything for them, that they may know they come to thee
freely.”
On the return of the king and prince, after this
interview, there was much talk at the Armenian court about Cyrus; one
spoke of his wisdom, another of his patience and resolution, another of
his mildness; one also spoke of his beauty, his fine figure and lofty
stature, whereupon Tigranes turned to his wife, saying: “Dost
thou think Cyrus handsome?”
“Indeed,” she answered, “I never
looked at him.” “At whom, then, didst thou look?”
asked Tigranes. “At him,” was the reply, “who said
that, to save me from servitude, he would give his own life.”
[176]
Of all the epics from which Moses of Khorene has derived
incidents or of which he gives fragments, the only one that has
survived among the people in complete form, with numerous variants, is
Sasmadzrer. There is a reference in the Bible to the story which
is related in this poem.
In
2 Kings xix. 37, and
Isaiah xxxvii. 38, we read:—
“And it came to pass, as he (Sennacherib) was
worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adramelech and
Sharezer, his sons, smote him with the sword; and they escaped into the
land of Armenia.”
Moses of Khorene tells the same story, adding that the
Armenian king assigned an abode to Sharezer in the south of Armenia and
to Adramelech in the south-east.
The epic, referred to above, relates the doings of the
two brothers and their descendants in Armenia, among the rest the
founding by them of the city of Sassoon.
The poem is divided into four parts. It is still
transmitted orally, word for word, in Armenia; in many places in
poetical form. During the last forty years, several versions of it have
been taken down in writing and published, and these have received much
attention from scholars. We cannot do more than mention this most
interesting production; the space at our disposal forbids our giving
even an outline of its contents.
So far we have derived our information from the prose
versions of passages in the epics found in Moses of Khorene either as
quotations or as paraphrased in his own words. But that historian has
also given a few extracts from the poems in their original form, being
the first historian to do so. To these extracts we now turn.
Although they are very few, they convey some idea of
ancient Armenian poetry. The historian says he has himself heard these
poems sung to the accompaniment of various musical instruments, of
which he gives long and minute descriptions. According to him, these
poems were sung chiefly in the province of Goghtan (the present Agulis,
in Russian Armenia). This place abounded in gardens and vineyards, and
produced a variety of good wines. The people were gay and fond of
merry-making. Their love of the old pagan religion and manners still
continued long after their conversion to Christianity. In this respect
they resembled the Saxons of Germany, and, even in the early part of
the fifth century, they observed pagan rites, sometimes openly,
sometimes secretly. One of the old Armenian songs, describing the birth
of the Armenian king Vahagn, is given in this volume, page 10. This is
supposed to be a myth describing the rise of the sun over the sea.
At sunrise the sky gradually becomes light; between the
light and the darkness there is a [177]kind of
struggle; all nature is waiting in expectancy of a life-giving power,
of the rising of the sun. It seems to be this expectancy of nature and
man that the poet likens to the travail of heaven, earth, and sea. The
“crimson reed” is perhaps the long red gleam sent forth
from the East over the sea at dawn.
We have already referred to Vahagn when dealing with
Armenian mythology. In the Armenian translation of the Bible, in 2
Maccabees iv. 19, the name “Vahagn” is substituted for
“Hercules.” This name is derived from the Sanscrit words
vah, “to bring,” and agn, “fire,”
and therefore means “fire-bringer.” In connection with
this, it is interesting to compare the Armenian legend with a similar
legend in the Rig-Veda. The word “Agni” is
the same as “Agn.” The god Agni was born of the
rising sun, to the accompaniment of thunder and lightning; of Vahagn
the song says: “Out of the flame sprang the child.”
“His hair was of fire and a beard had he of flame”; Agni
had “flaming hair and a golden beard.” A comparison of the
two poems shows that the similarity between them arises, not from the
imitation of one poet by the other, but from identity of theme, for the
belief in a fire-god or fire-hero is common to all mythologies.
According to Agathangelos, Vahagn was a favourite deity, and his temple
at Taron was famous. King Tiridates, when greeting the Armenian people
in a manifesto, says: “May Vahagn, of all Armenia, send you
courage!” He puts the name of Vahagn after the names of Aramazd
and Anahit. But, in Moses of Khorene, Vahagn is little more than an
ordinary king, the son of Tigranes I., though the historian gives the
story of his birth and his fights with dragons, as related by the
poets. He also calls Vahagn the first of the Vahuni or priestly
caste; but this caste was far more ancient than the historian thinks,
as sun worship is one of the oldest forms of religion.13
Moses of Khorene says, moreover, that there was an image
of Vahagn in Georgia, where he was worshipped as a god. [178]
As to the form of this poem—we note the
parallelism, similar to that of the old Hebrew songs: “To Sisera
a prey of diverse colours, a prey of diverse colours of
needlework, of diverse colours of needlework, on both sides”
(Judges
v. 30).14
The Song of Deborah, from which we have just quoted, is
supposed to be the oldest passage in the Bible, and is a good specimen
of ancient oriental poetry.
The songs quoted in Moses of Khorene are also examples
of this poetry, and will therefore be welcome to scholars, as throwing
light on this class of ancient literature.
The ancient Armenian form of verse has, doubtless, its
own national peculiarities. One of its characteristics is that it
consists of one main idea expressed in two or more sentences, regularly
connected with one another. There are no complex sentences, only short
simple ones, and the manner of expression is direct and definite, but,
in order that they may not tire the ear by monotony, they are, by means
of parallelism, systematically interwoven so as to form one consistent
whole. Thus the different sentences become related to one leading
thought. The words are carefully chosen and harmonious to the ear.
Metaphor and allegory abound. In colour and splendour these songs might
vie with any classical poem, and their existence is a proof that long
before the Christian era the Armenians had a perfected poetical
language, which, in its construction, imaginative force, brilliancy,
and grammatical development, bears the impress of literary culture.
Most of the nouns and adjectives in this poem are in the
diminutive form, which expresses endearment:—
| karmrik |
= |
reddish |
| achkunk |
= |
little eyes |
| egheknik |
= |
little reed |
| aregakunk |
= |
little suns |
| patanekik |
= |
little boy |
The adjectives used here do not qualify the nouns, but
simply serve as epithets, or attributes, like the adjectives in the
Homeric poems. The Armenian word dzirani,15 used in
this poem, does not always mean “red”; applied to a robe it
means “red,” applied to a belt it means
“variegated”; it may originally have had the sense of
“pleasing” (cf. Russian krasni, which originally
meant “beautiful,” but now denotes only
“red-coloured”). [179]
Another of these extant songs, belonging to the time
before the Christian era, has, as its theme, the love story of King
Artashes II., one of the greatest kings of the Arsacid dynasty. The
former, as well as all the other stories we have mentioned, belong to
the Haikazian dynasty, but the story of Artashes II. belongs to the
Arsacid dynasty and is contained in the second book of Moses of
Khorene, the contents of which are less legendary than those of the
first book. When narrating the story of Artashes, the historian
addresses himself to Sahak Bagratuni, by whose command his history was
written, in these terms:—
“The doings of Artashes are known to thee, through
the epical songs which are sung in the province of Goghtan; that is to
say, his founding of Artaxata (Artashat),16 his
alliance by marriage with the royal house of the Alans, his sons and
their descendants, the loves of Satenik with the Vishapazuns (progeny
of dragons) who were of the race of Astyages; his wars with them, the
overthrow of their dynasty, their slaughter, the burning of their
palaces, the rivalries of the sons of Artashes, the intrigues of their
wives, which further fomented the discord amongst them. Although these
things are well known to thee through the epical songs, I will,
nevertheless, narrate them again and will explain their allegorical
meaning.”
Then Moses of Khorene gives, in detail, a prose account
of the deeds of Artashes and his son Artavazd, as they are related in
the epic of Artashes, quoting, in the course of his narrative, the
songs given in this volume on pages 48 and 49.
Besides these songs, there are included in the history
two or three metrical lines, which must be extracts from the epic. One
of these lines contains the reply of the Alan king when he is asked to
give his daughter in marriage to Artashes: “From whence shall
brave ...” (see for the rest page 48, the last lines, in this
volume). The same poem contains a description of the wedding (see page
49 of this volume).
We learn from ancient Armenian historians that weddings
were times of great festivity, especially royal weddings. All the
people of the country, old and young, were astir. In the great square
they danced and sang, hand in hand. There was a special kind of song
sung on these occasions, called “Tzutzk.”
The marriage of Satenik was unhappy, because, besides
the Vishapazuns, she loved Argavan, the chief of the Median prisoners,
who was greatly honoured by Artashes. Another of the verses quoted by
Moses of Khorene refers to this amour of Satenik. These lines throw
some light on the nature of ancient Armenian metre. We quote the text
here:— [180]
“Tencha Satenik tenchans
Zartakhoir khavart
Ev ztitz khavardzi
I bardzitzn Argavana.”
The sense of the passage is not very clear, as it
contains two words the signification of which is disputed. M. Emin
holds that the meaning of these two words is the same, both signifying
“crown,” and he interprets the line as saying that Satenik
loves Argavan so dearly that she would gladly exchange her royal crown
for his princely diadem. After much controversy among scholars,
Professor Khalatian discovered that, in one Armenian dialect, these
words are the names of certain plants, about which there was a
superstition that, if they were put under the pillow of the beloved
being, and afterwards under the pillow of the lover, mutual affection
would be ensured; therefore, according to Professor Khalatian, the
passage means that Satenik was desirous of getting these plants from
under Argavan’s pillow.
In the time of Artashes science and poetry
flourished.
One of the sons of this king, Vroir, was a poet; another
was Artavazd, who was disliked by the people. The poem says that, when
the prince was born, the Vishapazuns stole him, and substituted a devil
in his place, and it was this evil spirit that went by the name of
Prince Artavazd.
In this poem, also, there is an account of the obsequies
of Artashes, which were celebrated with great splendour, for he was
dearly beloved by his subjects, many of whom committed suicide at his
grave, not caring to survive him. His son Artavazd, who was present,
became very jealous and uttered a complaint which Moses of Khorene
gives in the words of the epic (see page 65 of this volume).
We have omitted many other incidents of the story of
Artashes, as given by Moses of Khorene, but it may be gathered, from
what we have of the Artashes epic, that the whole poem was very
lengthy.
From other sources we know that the poem was sung by
minstrels as late as the eleventh century, for the well-known scholar
of that time, Grigor Magistros, says in one of his writings that he has
heard it, and he quotes some of its lines in their original form.
Artashes died in a foreign country while engaged in a
campaign. In his last moments he is seized with home-sickness, as he
remembers his fatherland. He recalls the spring of life and of the
year, when the light of dewy morn, like a thin mist, is spreading over
the towns and villages. The poem gives his dying words:—
[181]
“Who will give me the smoke of the chimneys and
the morn of Navasard,17
The running of the stag and the coursing of the
deer?
We sounded the horn and beat the drum
As is the manner of kings.”
We have already said that Artashes was a popular
king, much beloved by his people, whose death was greatly lamented;
this being so, no doubt the Artashes epic must have contained some
striking dirges, composed in honour of this monarch, but unfortunately
neither Moses of Khorene nor Grigor Magistros records any such songs in
connection with him. The despair and melancholy which cast their shadow
over pagans is conspicuous in ancient Armenian funeral songs. There
were companies of professional mourners, called egheramark
(“mothers of lamentation”), also there were groups of
singing maidens. All these followed the corpse, dressed in black, with
dishevelled hair, solemnly clapping their hands and moving in a slow
dance. Moses of Khorene gives details of such obsequies as we have
mentioned. Even now in some parts of Armenia such companies of mourners
exist. Faustus Byzand describes minutely the funeral of a prince and
gives also an account of the funeral of Queen Tigranuhi, of whom we
have already spoken, adding that the songs sung in her praise, on this
occasion, were such that Tigranes felt that they uttered all that was
passing in his own mind.
The subjects of funeral songs were the life of the
deceased, his stature, the manner of his death, and his domestic
relations, so that a collection of these songs would furnish a
biography.
We have also details of these dirges from other sources.
The song opens with a prologue, addressing the deceased and calling on
him to arise from his slumbers and carry on his usual occupations. It
then goes on to rebuke him for being deaf to the prayers of the
survivors and vouchsafing neither word nor smile. Next comes a
description of the new dwelling that the departed has chosen for
himself; the grave—an abode without doors or windows. Then comes
a repetition of the words spoken by the dead man during his last
illness, followed by a series of laudatory epithets, and finally there
is the recognition that all prayers for his recovery have been
unanswered, followed by an epilogue, taking farewell of the deceased
and sending messages by him to dead relatives and friends.
We learn from Moses of Khorene that, in his time,
besides the epics, there was other pre-Christian Armenian literature,
written and unwritten, of various kinds. We have had examples of songs
and epical stories in their gradual development from the stage when man
was weak and ignorant, when the people sought after the supernatural
and the marvellous, and the subject [182]of epic
songs was the mystic relation between nature and man, to the stage when
the heroes are no longer gods, but men endowed with valour and every
other virtue, without spot or flaw. The stories we have described are
sufficient to prove that Armenia had a large store of epic and heroic
poems, of which unhappily only fragments have come down to us.
Some specimens of other branches of pre-Christian
literature figuring in the list of Moses of Khorene are Temple
Books and Histories of Temples. Throughout ancient times
members of the priestly class were the chroniclers of the
nation’s history and its instructors in wisdom; and there is no
doubt that this was the case in Armenia. We know that the famous
Gnosticos Bardazan, in the second century A.D.,
came to Armenia to collect material for his history, and in the
fortress of Ani he made extracts from the Temple History, which was a
chronicle of the doings of the Armenian kings.
Armenia had its own written histories which were, for
the most part, destroyed on the introduction of Christianity in the
fourth century A.D. Moses of Khorene mentions
an Armenian historian named Ughup, who was a priest presiding over the
temple of Ani in 150 B.C.
To continue the list—we find Books of the
Kings, containing chronicles of kings and their works, and
Collections of Historical Songs, which were kept in the temples.
These collections were in existence in the fifth century A.D. Moses of Khorene gives extracts from them and they
were also sung by minstrels.
Tueliatz Songs recounted the doings of kings and
princes in chronological order, hence their name, Tueliatz, or
chronicles.
There were also other species of literature, such as
Historical Legends, not included in the list, from which Moses
of Khorene makes quotations elsewhere, such as the History of the
Origin of the Bagratuni Race, the History of Haik, and four
other books, without titles, of which he speaks with great
admiration.
There is mention of a poet, by name David, who wrote
The Wars between Armenia and Media, founding his narrative on
Armenian minstrel songs. Unfortunately, none of his works have come
down to us.
There is also mention of an Armenian translation, from
the Greek, of an epic called Legends of Aramasdes and Hermia.
Some scholars think that this must be one of the lost books of Homer,
as there are still extant some fragments of an Armenian translation of
the Homeric poems.
The Hindoos believed that originally dramas were
invented by the gods and were performed in heaven. They were brought to
earth by Brahma and introduced to men. Whether the ancient Armenians
held a similar belief we cannot tell, but it appears that they had, in
[183]early times, a drama of their own. The
themes of their plays were the doings of the gods of the earth, but
there is no record that in Armenia drama ever reached such a high level
as it attained in Greece. It may be noticed that, though Persia, the
neighbour of Armenia, was rich in lyric and epic poetry, it produced no
dramatic literature. It is true that, in Mohammedan times, the Persians
had a religious drama; but this merely formed part of their worship and
has never had an independent development.
But the Armenians must have done better, as mention is
made of Armenian drama by Greek and Roman writers, from whom we learn
that King Artavazd I.18 wrote tragedies, some of which
were known to Plutarch. We also learn from Plutarch and others that, in
the time of Tigranes II., there were theatres in Armenia, and Plutarch
records that, when Lucullus entered Tigranocerta, he found a body of
actors busily engaged in preparing to produce a drama in the theatre
newly built by Tigranes, and made use of them in the games and other
public diversions in honour of his victory. Armenian historians also
make mention of the theatres in Armenia. As late as the fifth century
A.D., Hovhannes Mandakuni, a religious author,
wrote an essay against theatres and actors, which shows that, even
after the introduction of Christianity, drama survived in Armenia.
At later periods, in Law Books, restrictions on theatres
are mentioned.
In order to determine the date of the Heroic Poems, we
must define the different periods of Armenian history. It is now
generally accepted by scholars that, towards the end of the seventh
century B.C., the Vannic or Chaldean kingdom
fell before the invading hordes of Cimmerians or Scythians, and, during
the period of anarchy, Armenians also entered the country, which was
henceforth to bear the name of “Armenia.” The only
uncertainty with regard to this migration is about the date. It is
universally agreed that it cannot have been later than the seventh
century B.C., though it may have been earlier.
In the fifth century B.C. Xenophon found
Armenia an established kingdom under Tigranes I. Vahe was the last of
the Haikazian dynasty. He fell in the war with Alexander the Great in
330 B.C.
The next Armenian dynasty was that of the Arsacidae, of
which the first king was Wagharshag I., whose reign began in 149
B.C.
All the epical songs that we have mentioned belong to
the Haikazian period, except the Artashes Cycle, which belongs to the
Arsacid period. During the 185 years between these two periods, there
was no national independence to supply themes for new epics and
therefore there is no heroic poetry belonging to this interval.
[184]
The second period of Armenian literature (before the
establishment of Christianity) extends from the accession of the
Arsacid dynasty to the fourth century A.D.
During this period, learning flourished and the
libraries in the temples and palaces were the centre of culture. The
libraries in palaces were open to any one who wished to consult the
archives with a view to writing histories of the countries, and in the
temples the priests were engaged in compiling records of the past. In
these libraries the histories of the Haikazian dynasty were kept. To
this period belongs the epic of Artashes.
Under the rule of the Arsacidae, the number of the
nobles greatly increased and the chief amusement of the king and the
nobility was sport. Nearly every noble had his own park, which was full
of all kinds of deer and in which special sporting parties were given.
One of the chief attractions of these parties was the minstrels who
sang songs specially composed for the occasion. As upwards of seventy
families were ennobled under the Arsacidae, and entertainments were
given both by them and by those of lower rank, it will be understood
that the number of minstrels must have been large.
As we have mentioned, to this period belongs the
Artashes Cycle (A.D. 85–126).
We have also some evidence as to the date of the epics
from foreign sources. Armenian epics must have been known, not only in
Armenia itself, but in other countries. In migration, their form must
sometimes have changed, as, in Plato, we have found the legend of Ara
transformed into the story of Er. As the story of Ara was known to
Plato, we may take for granted that it existed in the fourth century
B.C.
Strabo gives an erroneous etymology of the name
“Armenia,” which he derives from
“Armenios.”19 Perhaps he had heard of Aram,
whose story is told in the epics. This story is known to us through
Moses of Khorene, who derives the word “Armenia” from Aram,
and says that the country was called by this name only by foreigners.
As to the etymology of the word “Armenia,” there are many
different opinions which we cannot discuss here; we will only say that
the name “Armenia” is found in an inscription of Darius
Hystaspes (510 B.C.).
We confine ourselves to one more foreign reference to
Armenian epics, viz., that of the philosopher Olympiodorus, who, in an
assembly of wise men at Athens, gave an account of an old book which
had existed in former times and which contained the history of Noah and
his descendants. He added that the incidents related in this book were
still sung by Armenian minstrels to the accompaniment of various
musical instruments. [185]
We have frequently quoted Moses of Khorene, whose work
contains all the extant remains of the epics and all the information
that has come down to us with regard to these poems. In fact the first
book of his History, as well as the first nine chapters of Book II.,
consists of summaries and quotations from epics, together with other
legends. In taking leave of the pre-Christian period of Armenia let us
cast a glance on this historian and his work.
Moses of Khorene was born some time between A.D. 404 and 408. He was one of those young Armenians who
were sent by the ecclesiastical authorities to Greece for higher
education. After completing his studies, he worked in the libraries of
Alexandria, Palestine, and other places. On his return from Palestine,
he was shipwrecked on the coast of Italy; thence he went to Rome,
Athens, and Byzantium, returning to Armenia about 440. He found his
benefactors dead, the Arsacid dynasty extinct, and Christianity
endangered by the Persians. It is said that on his return he was so
disappointed in both the clergy and the laity—being especially
grieved by the ignorance of the former—that he retired into
solitude and remained concealed for some time. It happened that the
Catholicos Gute, while travelling, alighted at a certain village where
he was entertained by the peasants, each of whom made a short speech in
his honour. An old man who was of the company was urged also to say
something. At first he excused himself on the plea that he was a
stranger, but, on being further pressed, to the surprise of all
present, he recited an impromptu ode greeting the Catholicos and ended
by disclosing his identity, proclaiming himself Moses of Khorene. At
first the Catholicos was incredulous, but, on a careful examination of
the old man’s features, he recognised him as one of his former
fellow-students, whereupon he burst into tears and held him in a long
embrace.
That day was one of great rejoicing in Armenia, and,
soon after, Moses became Bishop of Bagravand.
These Armenian students educated abroad were looked on
askance by some of the ignorant clergy, and, for this reason, some of
the former used to retire and study in seclusion. In his History, Moses
of Khorene inveighs bitterly against these illiterate priests.
Ghazar Pharpe says:—
“Moses, the philosopher of blessed memory, met
with much opposition and annoyance from the unlearned clergy, who
called this enlightened man a heretic, and in their ignorance found
fault with his books, besides performing many unfriendly acts towards
him.”
After this passage, several pages of the manuscript are
missing. The next page we have begins:—
“They exhumed his bones from the grave and threw
them into the river.” [186]
It is doubtful whether these words refer to Moses or to
some one else.
Moses of Khorene attempted to write the history of two
or three thousand years, beginning with dark and unknown ages, weaving
his materials in such a way as to produce a vivid and life-like
picture, tinged with the colours of all the centuries which he depicts.
He writes in poetic language and his style is simple and picturesque.
Every event recorded by him becomes beautiful, noble, and great. There
is not a paragraph, not a sentence, which falls below the general level
of the work. The History is a marvellous panorama, which, as it
unfolds, fills us with ever fresh wonder and admiration. The story of
Tiridates is narrated in such a way as to draw tears from every reader
and—to use an Armenian expression—to make him feel as if
the hairs of his head had turned into thorns. He speaks with such warm
admiration of Tigranes that it might be thought he was speaking of a
contemporary.
In the following passage he displays strong feeling, in
reference to one of his teachers whom he found dead on his return from
abroad.
“Where is the calm of those gentle eyes, which to
the just gave rest, and inspired the guilty with awe?
“Where is the smile of his cheerful lips, as he
met his pupils?
“Where is the hope that enlivened the tedium of
weary journeys? that gave repose in the midst of labour?
“How shall I write my tragedy? and who is there to
weep at it?”
One sees by his writing that Moses was a man of strong
character, with firm principles, neither vacillating nor superficial.
The reader is profoundly impressed by his words; they sink deeply into
him, pressing like lead on a tablet, and casting him under the spell of
the author. This effect is due, in part, to his convincing power; it is
impossible not to realise what he records. His statements are concise;
what others would take pages to express, he conveys in a few words. In
descriptive powers he is unrivalled, not only among Armenians, but even
as compared with Greek and Roman historians. His graphic pictures of
people and places, together with his remarks and reflections and his
frequent quotations from the national epics, prove his historical skill
and literary taste.
In a word, as one reads him, one feels him to be a
genius of the first magnitude.
Moses of Khorene wrote his History at the request of
Sahak Bagratuni, a man of noble or princely birth. The History consists
of three books. Book I., as we have already said, is mainly based on
national epics and legends. Although these relate only to a few heroes,
the treatment is very elaborate.
Then comes the history of 180 years, over which he
passes very lightly, merely giving a [187]list of
names, with a few words added to each. This shows that, for this
period, he has not been able to find any material in the native epics
and songs.
Book II. relates to the Arsacid dynasty, speaking also
of the introduction of Christianity, and going on to the death of
Tiridates and of Gregory the Illuminator.
Book III. contains the history of the successors of
Tiridates up to the sad end of the Arsacid dynasty. This book ends with
a long lament over the pitiful plight of Armenia. It contains also a
bitter invective against the author’s
contemporaries—princes, judges, clergy, soldiery—in short
against all who, being careless of duty and regardless of the ideal,
lead the people astray.
Moses of Khorene has left other works besides his
History, one of which is a Geography, containing, among other things,
an account of the British Isles.
For 1400 years, the History of Moses of Khorene was
revered and accepted as the only authentic History of Armenia; and it
was not till the nineteenth century that criticism was directed against
it, not only by Armenian scholars, but also by French, German, Italian,
English, and Russian scholars. This criticism was chiefly levelled at
the principal source from which the Armenian historian professed to
draw his information.
Arshak the Great, according to Moses, after casting off
the Macedonian yoke and conquering Assyria, set his brother,
Wargharshak, on the throne of Armenia. So commences the Arsacid
dynasty. The new king wished to know what kind of men had been ruling
the country before him. Was he (he asked) the successor of brave men or
of bad men? He found an intelligent man, a Syrian, named
Mar-Abas-Katina, and sent him to his brother, Arshak the Great, with
this letter:—
“To Arshak, the king of the earth and the sea,
whose form and person are like unto the gods and whose triumphs are
above those of all kings; the greatness of whose mind can fathom all
things of earth, Wargharshak, thy youngest brother and comrade in arms,
appointed by thee King of Armenia, greeting. Victory ever attend
thee.
“I have received from thee the behest to encourage
bravery and wisdom. I have not forgotten thy counsel. On the contrary,
I have done all that my mind could devise or my skill carry into
effect, and now, thanks to thy guardianship, I have put this country in
order. And next I want to know who, before myself, has subdued the land
of Armenia, and from whom are descended the noble families who are
established here. There does not seem to be any fixed grade of classes;
among the chief men, it is impossible to ascertain which is highest and
which lowest; so that some confusion ensues. I therefore beg that the
archives may be opened in the presence of this man whom I have sent to
present himself in thy great [188]country, in order
that he may bring back the information that is desired by thy son and
brother.”
This Syrian (says the historian) found in the library at
Nineveh a book translated from the Chaldean into Greek, by order of
Alexander the Great, which contained various ancient histories. From
this book Mar-Abas copied only the authentic history of Armenia, which
he took back to Wargharshak, who, esteeming this document his most
precious treasure, preserved it with great care in his palace and
engraved part of it on a stone monument.
It is this document of Mar-Abas-Katina that Moses of
Khorene cites as his chief authority for the early authentic history of
Armenia, though he also mentions several other native and foreign
writers as sources of his work.
With regard to these statements, critics point out that
the library of Nineveh was not in existence in the second century
B.C., as it was destroyed in 625 B.C.; some even maintain that Mar-Abas-Katina was a
fictitious personage, invented by Moses of Khorene to give more weight
to his own statements, in accordance with the universal custom of his
time, when contemporary writings were continually ascribed to the great
men of old or even to imaginary characters. Moses of Khorene, say these
critics, was himself a great lover of the folklore, legends, and epics
of his country, but he knew that, if he gave these as his only source
of information, his History would gain no credence, especially as, at
the period when he wrote, just after the establishment of Christianity,
everything pagan was regarded with suspicion. Moreover, Moses, being
himself a bishop, could not have avowed such a source for all his
statements, though, as we have said, he quotes from the epics and says
that some of the contents of his work are derived from them. It is,
however, generally admitted that Moses of Khorene had in his hands such
a book as he describes and that this book was one of his sources. The
book has even been traced.
As to Mar-Abas-Katina, although his book may not have
been compiled under the circumstances described in the History, Moses
may have believed that he was the author of the book in his possession.
Professor Mar has even found, in Arabic literature, some independent
traces of Mar-Abas-Katina.
There is also some controversy about the date of Moses
of Khorene himself. By some he is placed even as late as the seventh
century, because his writings contain references to events as late as
that period.
But it is not difficult to account for this without
disputing the generally received date of the historian, for, when we
consider how many ancient books have been re-edited, we see
[189]how easily the work before us may have been
touched up by a later hand in the seventh century.20
In concluding this account of Moses of Khorene, we must
acknowledge that he has not only rendered much service to Armenian
history, but that his book is one of the great works of all literature,
and, if it were better known, would take a high place among the
masterpieces of the world.
The most momentous event in the national life of
Armenia—an event which was the chief determining factor in the
early history of the country—was the change of religion made by
the adoption of Christianity, the foundation of which had been already
laid by King Abgarus (A.D. 3–34) and the
preaching of the Apostles St. Thaddeus (A.D.
33–48) and St. Bartholomew (A.D. 49), and
finally established by Tiridates (A.D.
286–342). By this the Armenians were entirely severed from the
pagan Persians and brought into close contact with the Greeks, whose
representative was then the Emperor of Byzantium. As a result of this
religious agreement, a treaty was concluded in 319 between Tiridates
and Constantine, the first Christian Emperor of Rome, by which the two
Christian monarchs bound themselves to defend each other against all
pagans.
The adoption of Christianity meant, to the Armenians, a
revolution in their whole view of life, a severance from their
ancestral beliefs, though these beliefs have left traces in Armenian
folklore which are visible even to this day. These beliefs and the
folklore arising out of them were regarded by the Christian clergy as a
poisonous flower grown up in the fields of paganism. The historians of
the period have chronicled the efforts of the clergy to exterminate
every relic of the old faith. Temples were pulled down and churches
built in their stead; images and other monuments were broken in pieces;
heathen books and records were destroyed; pagan festivals were turned
into Christian ones. We learn from Faustus of Byzantium that laws were
even made against the use and the singing of pagan songs, but,
notwithstanding this persecution, according to Faustus and other
historians, the Armenians “languished for these songs.”
Even as late as the fifth century, when there was an attempt to restore
paganism in Armenia, Vasak Suni had books of these songs copied and
distributed among the people in order to win them back to heathenism.
This had the effect of rekindling hostility against the songs, and the
books were destroyed when Christianity finally triumphed, although, as
we have shown above, echoes of the songs are to be heard as late as the
eleventh century.
Gregory the Illuminator (A.D.
239–325), who converted Armenia to Christianity, belonged
[190]to the royal race of the Arsacidae. He had
studied at Caesarea. He and his family had hellenising tendencies in
religion, education, and politics. There was a section opposed to
Hellenism which favoured Syrian ideas and, in politics, inclined to
Persia. At this early period of Christianity, the Bible was read in
Greek in the north-west provinces of Armenia, while in the south-east
provinces it was read in Syriac. During this period, schools were
established for the education of the young on Christian principles. Out
of the pupils in these schools about 100 were chosen to be sent to
educational centres abroad, where Greek learning was taught. At the
time when this contact of Armenians with Greek culture took place, the
ancient glories of Hellas were past, and Greek scholars busied
themselves chiefly with theological subtilties. Of course the main
object of educating the students from the Christian schools was to
indoctrinate them in religious lore and fit them for the priesthood,
but, nevertheless, the youths also brought away with them a tincture of
Greek culture, and this led to the rise of the Golden Age of Armenian
literature.
It was the aim of the Greek Empire at this time to make
the Armenian Church a branch of the Greek Church and to gain a
political ascendency over the Armenians, but the head of the Armenian
Church and the leaders of the intellectual movement were resolved on
religious and national independence. Towards that end two important
steps were taken. In 404, the Armenian alphabet was invented, and, in
491, the Armenian Church was separated from the Greek Church.
The Armenian language belongs to the Indo-European
group. Though it has been regarded by some as an offshoot of the Iranic
branch, recent scholars of eminence have maintained its right to rank
as a distinct branch, intermediate between the Iranic and the European.
It has a very independent character and many peculiarities of its own;
it has also great strength and flexibility. It has a great number of
roots, and is capable of expressing ideas of all kinds and denoting
fine shades of meaning. It is read from left to right like European
languages. It is rich in particles, to which circumstance its
expressiveness is partly due. It has also a treasure of dialectic
words, which have the effect of importing vigour to Armenian speech. It
is not harsh in sound, as has been alleged by some who are imperfectly
acquainted with it. Its alphabet consists of thirty-six characters,
with which it is possible to represent every variety of sound,
consisting of vowels as well as consonants; it has no vowel points, in
this respect resembling the European, and differing from most oriental,
alphabets. The spelling is almost perfectly phonetic.
The language of the period with which we are dealing was
Grabar or Ancient Armenian, which remained the literary language
till the beginning of the nineteenth century and is still [191]the Church language, being used in all
religious services. Modern Armenian has not departed very widely from
Grabar. During pagan times, the Armenians had an alphabet of
their own, but, on the introduction of Christianity, it was discarded
on account of its pagan origin.
The honour of being the inventor of the new Armenian
alphabet belongs to St. Mesrop (361–440), a former secretary of
King Tiridates. He found some of the ancient letters and invented
others to complete the alphabet in 404. St. Mesrop and St. Sahak
(353–439) were the forerunners of the Armenian intellectual
movement, the former as the inventor of the alphabet, the latter,
together with his pupils, as the translator of the Bible into Armenian.
This translation is called “the Queen of Translations.” The
language is so simple and direct, and, at the same time, so beautiful,
that there is nothing to be compared with it.
The Armenian translation of the Bible is the
foundation-stone of Armenian Christianity. Perhaps no translation of
the Scriptures has ever made so deep an impression on a people as this
one has made on the Armenians. By them it was taken as a symbolical
history of their own country. Did not the events recorded in the very
first chapters happen in Armenia? and also the second Creation after
the Flood? Did not their beloved mountain, Ararat, figure in the latter
story? In the Bible they found even the names of their national heroes,
Haik and Vahagn, though, as we have seen, for the latter names only the
translators are responsible. Other Bible stories resemble the records
of Armenian history. Moses led his tribe from the land of bondage into
a land of freedom, just as Haik did. All the stories of suffering under
a foreign yoke and of revolt against oppression have their parallels in
the annals of Armenia.
At the end of the fourth century (374–383), Nerses
the Great was Catholicos. During these ten years he displayed great
energy. Under his rule, many councils were held and many regulations
drawn up to safeguard the morals of the people. In addition to this, a
number of schools, hospitals, orphanages, almshouses, and other
charitable institutions arose under his supervision. A contemporary
historian says that during Nerses’ term of office, upwards of
2000 abbeys and monasteries were built. These religious houses served
as centres, not only of religious life, but also of learning, where
numerous ecclesiastics and teachers were trained. This intellectual
movement, which was of a purely religious and educational character,
not merely lived through the political tempest of those times, but
gradually grew and progressed. In the year 400, the representative of
the Arsacid dynasty on the throne was Vramshapuh, an able monarch, who,
being himself a lover of peace, did much to encourage and foster the
intellectual movement and to keep the country free from foreign foes
and internal dissensions. King Vramshapuh reigned twenty-one years and
it was, approximately, these years that constituted what is called
“the Golden Age of Armenian literature.” [192]
St. Sahak (353–439), who, with St. Mesrop, was the
moving spirit of the intellectual movement, was Catholicos during part
of this period.
The Golden Period was of short duration, only lasting
twenty-five years, but it was rich in achievements. The students
educated abroad on their return originated a new literature, pervaded
by Christian ideas. They considered themselves as torch-bearers in the
new movement, and all their work is animated by inspiration.
This period is one of marvellous activity. The new
national alphabet had charms that wrought like magic and, coupled with
the new religion of hope, captivated all Armenian hearts. Armenians
realised that it was a religion for the people, not merely for the
great and powerful. All over Armenia national schools were opened.
Nearly every book of importance written in Greek and Syriac was
translated into Armenian, as well as some of the Latin authors.
Translation was a recognised profession, and “translator”
was a title of honour, like the European “doctor.” There
are upwards of fifty chronicles and histories written in ancient
Armenian, which is richer in literature than the Greek of the same
period, and the Armenian language is so flexible and so well adapted to
the exact rendering of every kind of literature that if, for instance,
the Anabasis of Xenophon were lost, it might be reproduced in Greek,
almost word for word, from the Armenian version. Among the writings
which now survive only in Armenian, the originals having been lost, are
the Homilies of St. John Chrysostom, two works of Philo on
Providence, together with some of his Biblical commentaries, the
Chronicle of Eusebius, the works of St. Ephrem and others.
Besides translations, Armenia produced, during the
period with which we are concerned, original works, chiefly of an
historical character. These give very succinct accounts of the Persian
and Mongol invasions, and throw fresh light on the state of the East
during the Middle Ages. As these works lie outside our present subject,
we cannot here even name their authors. Those who wish to investigate
them are referred to what we have written elsewhere.21
What is most remarkable is that, at the very beginning
of the intellectual movement, when the alphabet had just been formed,
the literary language is so highly developed, so rich and subtle, that
it is more like a language which is the product of centuries of
culture. This very fact shows that culture was no novelty in Armenia.
The new movement only introduced a fresh era in Armenian
civilisation.
Twenty-five years after the introduction of the Armenian
alphabet, the Arsacid dynasty [193]fell (428), the last
king being Artashir III. From this time the Armenians have ceased to be
politically independent.
From 432 onwards, the greater part of Armenia was
governed by Persian satraps. The Persians regarded with great
apprehension the adoption of Christianity in Armenia, as this caused
the Armenians to enter into closer relations with the Greeks. As a
matter of fact, at the end of the fourth century, the Greeks came to
aid the Armenians in driving away the Persians. It was the aim of the
Persians to eradicate Christianity from Armenia. In order to further
this object, they declared war on the Greek Empire. The latter, instead
of fighting, made peace with the Persians, accepting very humiliating
terms. The Armenians were left to their fate, but, nevertheless, they
resolved to stand up for their religion against the Persian monarch,
who led a great army against them with the intention of enforcing
Zoroastrianism. At this time there was no Armenian king. The majority
of the remaining princes and nobles, however, formed a regular army,
the people gladly serving as volunteers, though there was a very small
party, led by Prince Vasak Suni, that were inclined, for political
reasons, to entertain the Persian proposals.
All this took place between 449 and 454. The first
religious war (451) is known as Vardanantz, because Vardan
Manikomian, who was the commander-in-chief of the Armenian army of
defence, was the moving spirit in the struggle of Armenian Christianity
against the religion of Persia. He fell in the battle of Avarair, but
his fame survived him and he is the most beloved of Armenian
heroes.
This war, though it crushed the hopes in which the
Armenians had indulged themselves of regaining their political
independence, nevertheless convinced the Persians of the impossibility
of uprooting a religion which was so firmly implanted in the hearts of
the people.
The first religious war was followed by a second, in
which the Armenian princes offered a valiant resistance and the
Persians were obliged to give way. The leader of the resisting princes
was appointed satrap by the Persians. Thus Armenia won back partial
independence, the Persians themselves appointing an Armenian satrap and
proclaiming religious liberty. The Chief of the Magi, who was sent to
convert the Armenians to Mazdiism, returned unsuccessful and reported
to the Persian king: “Even if the immortals themselves came to
our aid, it would be impossible to establish Mazdiism in
Armenia.” Although Vardan and his followers perished in this war,
and although the Armenians, apparently, lost the battle, the struggle
resulted in the triumph of the ideal for which Armenia was
struggling—that of religious freedom. This the Persians realised
and never, after this time, did they make any attempt to force the
Armenians to change their faith. Neither did any of the various
Mohammedan conquerors [194]venture on any steps
towards bringing about the conversion of the whole Armenian nation,
though they have enforced conformity on a small scale; they have had to
content themselves with political supremacy. The Mohammedan world has
realised that Christianity is a great power in Armenia, and this is the
reason why the religious heads of the nation—the Catholicos and
the patriarchs—meet with great consideration, not only from the
governments of Christian states, but also from Mohammedan powers; both
by Christian and by Mohammedan countries which have rule over Armenia
these dignitaries are recognised as representatives of their country,
not only in religious, but also in secular affairs. Thus the Christian
National Church has been one of the chief factors of the unity and the
national consciousness which exists among Armenians even up to the
present day, and this is the reason why the battle of Vardan is
regarded as a national triumph and is still annually
commemorated.22
When Armenia had ceased to be an independent state, its
literature became more religious, as the clergy were anxious to foster
devotion. Christianity introduced a new kind of poetry, namely, Church
hymns and chants. These were called, in Armenian, sharakans.
They were not only written in metre, but they were composed with a view
to being sung. The word sharakan means a “row of
gems.” Historians of the Middle Ages say that the
sharakans were mainly written by the “translators,”
i.e., by writers of the fourth and fifth centuries. As a matter
of fact, very few sharakans were written after the thirteenth
century. Since then, no prayers or hymns have been introduced into the
Armenian Church.
It is said by writers of the Middle Ages that St. Sahak
arranged the sharakans for ten voices and St. Stephanos for
twenty-six voices, corresponding to created things—elements,
plants, birds, and animals. There were also women sharakan
writers. One of these was Sahakadukht, who lived in the eighth century.
She not only wrote, but also composed music, and taught singing. Out of
modesty, she used to hide behind a curtain, whence she gave instruction
to both sexes. An historian of the time, Ghevond Eretz, says of her
sharakans: “They were angelic songs on earth.”
Singing was considered a great art in Armenia, and musicians were
called “philosophers.” Several of such
“philosophers” were canonised and had the word
“philosopher” prefixed to their names. The fame of some of
these musicians spread to foreign lands. This explains the fact that,
when Catholicos Petros Getadardz went to Constantinople, he took with
him a company of musicians, whom he presented, as a gift, for the
service of the Byzantine court.
There was a revival of sharakan-writing in the
thirteenth century, which was a flourishing [195]literary period. It was during this time
that Bishop Khachatour Tarinetzi invented distinctively Armenian
musical notes, which are quite unrelated to European ones, so that the
Armenians had now, not only an alphabet of their own, but also their
own musical notation, and their hymns could be set to music. This
notation was improved in the eighteenth century.
Armenian hymns are written in a style which is not only
picturesque, but which also has a charm of its own; its colours are
very rich; the pictures it conjures up are vivid. When one remembers
that many of them were written when national life and death were
hanging in the balance, because of foreign oppression, at a time when
they had no one to turn to but the Creator, we understand how it is
that so much tenderness, hope, and devotion are embodied in these
“rows of gems,” nor can one help thinking that Armenian is
the natural language for religious poems. A vein of mysticism runs
through many of these hymns, especially through those written by
Gregory of Narek (951–1009), one example of
which—“The Christ-Child”—appears on page 113 of
this volume. But this mysticism is not obscure; on the contrary, it is
to the hymn what light and shade are to a picture serving to bring it
into touch with nature.
Hymns have always been popular among the Armenians. Even
peasants know them by heart and sing them. The hymn tunes are unique,
being entirely independent of those of other Christian nations. Their
somewhat strange rhythm recalls the chorus of singers round the altars
of the pagan gods. No doubt some pagan melodies have found their way
into the Christian hymn tunes of Armenia.
The Armenians are rich in folksongs. The music to which
these songs are set possesses great charm. In it, also, the rhythm is
most important. An Armenian composer, speaking of these folksongs,
says:—
“By means of those ethereal and heavenly waves of
melody one sees enchanting mermaids who, after dancing on the banks of
large and small lakes and poising themselves on the waters, allure
towards themselves the pagan Armenians, offering love kisses to all
minstrels.”
In later years Armenian music and poetry were affected
by European influence, but in her hymns and folksongs she has musical
treasures that are all her own.
Side by side with the written literature of this period,
the unwritten literature continued to grow. The latter consists mainly
of folktales, fables, and proverbs.
It is easy to distinguish a Christian folktale from a
pagan one by the different ideals embodied in it. Some of the folktales
of this period have arisen out of historical events.
In the folktales, it is the youngest child that is the
hero or heroine. These stories express [196]the
people’s outlook on life and are the product of their
experiences, which have been handed down from generation to
generation.
There is a great deal of folklore current in Armenia,
some of which has been collected and published.
Grigor Magistros says that, in his time, unwritten
fables in rhyme were very popular.
There are also many Armenian proverbs. It seems to have
been a custom in ancient times—and the usage is still retained in
some places—for a man to go and meet the girl he wishes to marry
on the banks of a stream or in a forest and to ask her a riddle. If she
gives the correct answer to the riddle, he marries her.
Here are a few of the riddles used on these
occasions:—
“What paper is it that you cannot write on? and
what sort of pen can write on this paper?”
A maiden who desires to marry the man should
answer:—
“The heart is the paper on which no pen can write;
language is the pen that writes on the heart.”
“What rose is it that opens in the winter and in
due time fades and is gone?”
Answer: “Snow is the rose that opens in the
winter; when summer comes, it fades and is gone.”
“The brother chases the sister, the sister the
brother, but neither can catch the other.”
Answer: “The sun and the moon.”
There is another usage, belonging especially to young
girls, which has given rise to an extensive literature. This literature
consists of charm-verses, which are used for fortune-telling. A
selection of these is given on pages 67–68.
Once a year, on the Eve of Ascension Day, young maidens
who want their fortunes told decorate a bowl with certain specially
selected flowers. Into this bowl each girl casts a token—a ring,
a brooch, a thimble. After filling the bowl with flowers of seven
different kinds, and water drawn from seven springs, they cover it with
an embroidered cloth and take it by night to the priest, who says a
prayer over it. They then put it out in the moonlight, open to the
stars, leaving it till dawn. Next morning, at daybreak, furnished with
provisions for the whole day, they go out of the village carrying the
bowl, to the side of a spring, to the foot of a mountain, or into an
open field, gathering, on the way, various kinds of flowers, with which
they deck themselves. Arrived at their destination, they first play
games, dance, and sing, then they take a beautiful little girl, too
young to tell where the sun rises, who has been previously chosen for
their purpose and gaily dressed for the occasion, and who does not know
to whom [197]each token belongs, and cover her face
with a richly wrought veil, so that she may not see what is in the
bowl. The child draws the articles out of the bowl, one by one, and
holds each in her hand. While she does this, one of the party recites a
charm-song, and the owner of each token takes the song which
accompanies it as her fortune.
There are thousands of these charm-songs. In form they
are very simple. Sometimes two consecutive lines deal with quite
distinct subjects, though they rhyme together and their construction is
the same. Each is a perfect poem.
After the end of the Arsacid dynasty, Armenia remained
under the rule of Persia for two hundred years. During this period,
sometimes the whole country fell temporarily into the hands of the
Greeks; on other occasions the same fate befell a few provinces.
Speaking generally, after the fall of the Arsacidae, the
eastern—and more extensive—part of Armenia remained under
Persian rule, and the western—and smaller—part came under
Greek dominion. The Greeks and the Persians were continually fighting
with one another for the possession of the whole country. Armenia was
the battlefield, and the sufferer was always the Armenian people. After
the Arabs had embraced Mohammedanism, they formed a powerful empire,
conquering Mesopotamia and then passing on to Persia. They forced the
Persians to become Mohammedans, and in 640 entered Armenia. Eastern
Armenia, which was then in the hands of the Persians, fell into their
possession.
The Greeks greatly dreaded the taking of Armenia by the
Arabs, as it formed a strong barrier against the assault of the Greek
colonies in Asia Minor. Therefore, as they had before fought in Armenia
against the Persians, so they now proceeded to fight against the Arabs;
and again Armenia was the battlefield and the sufferers were the
Armenians. The Greeks came from time to time demanding tribute of them,
and if their demand were resisted, the people were plundered and
slaughtered. On the departure of the Greek army, the Arabs came, making
the same demand. Thus, during the first two hundred years following the
fall of the Arsacidae, the Armenians were between the two fires of the
Persians and the Greeks, and then for another two hundred years between
the two fires of the Greeks and the Arabs. During this period, the
Armenian princes offered resistance from time to time and succeeded in
regaining independence for short intervals. The governors set by the
Arabs over Armenia were in the habit of persecuting the native princes,
to prevent them from organising revolts. Of these governors, the most
bloodthirsty were Kashm and Bugha. The former cunningly invited all the
Armenian princes to the town of Nakhejevan, where they assembled in the
church; whereupon, by order of the government, the church was
surrounded by piles of wood and set on fire, and the princes burnt
alive (704). The army was then set to plunder and [198]slaughter the Armenians and burn the towns
and villages, as the people, deprived of their princes, could offer no
resistance. Many were exiled to the Arab capital, Damascus. Bugha (850)
surpassed even Kashm in his cruelty, but we need not chronicle his
atrocities here. Under such governors as these, the tribute and the
taxes were enormous, and the people became very poor. There were,
however, also good governors, during whose rule the people were free
from oppression and were allowed to pursue their peaceful
occupations.
But gradually the power of the Arabs declined.
The Armenians took advantage of the weakening of the
Arab power to form independent kingdoms. One of the principal noble
families during the period of Arab dominion was that of the Bagratuni.
This family was rich and powerful and had much land in its possession.
Under the Arsacidae, the head of this family was hereditary
“coronator” (i.e., he had the privilege of putting
the crown on the king’s head, on the occasion of a new
sovereign). During the rule of the Arabs, the command of the Armenian
army was given to this family. The Bagratuni, though extremely
courageous and patriotic, were also cautious and tactful in their
relations with the Arabs, whom they served faithfully, thus gaining the
respect of the Khalifs. As they also won the love and esteem of their
own countrymen by rebuilding and restoring what the Arabs had
destroyed, they were able to act as mediators between the Khalifs and
the Armenian people. In wars against the enemies of the Arabs, members
of this family had many successes. Once a Persian prince revolted
against the Khalif and a Persian army of 80,000 marched into Armenia.
The Arabs were too weak to make any resistance, but Ashot Bagratuni
with his troops defeated the invaders. After the victory, the Khalif of
Bagdad sent a crown to Ashot, thus making him a king, thinking,
“He is so powerful that, if I do not give him a crown, he will
seize one for himself.”
Thus in 885 Ashot became the first king of the Bagratuni
dynasty. The Greek emperor, Basil I., also sent a crown to Ashot, with
a view to gaining the friendship and influence of Armenia. During the
dominion of the Bagratuni, the régime of the Arsacidae was
restored and the country prospered. Ani, which was the seat of
government during the greater part of this period, though formerly it
was little more than a fortress, became one of the most flourishing
cities of the time. It was full of fine edifices—churches,
palaces, museums, etc.—and was called “the city of a
thousand and one churches.” Its fame even spread to foreign
lands.
There were several other noble Armenian families with
ambitions. In 908 one of these—the Ardzruni family—made the
lands they held into a kingdom, called Vaspurakan, with Van as a
capital city. In taking this step they were encouraged by the Arabs,
who were watching with alarm the growing power of the Bagratuni.
[199]
In 908 another Armenian kingdom was set up with Kars as
its capital.
Ashot III., who was then the king of the Bagratuni
dynasty, was quite aware that the Arabs were encouraging the formation
of small Armenian kingdoms, but he offered no opposition, leaving his
rivals alone to serve the people each in his own way.
This Ashot was one of the greatest sovereigns of this
dynasty. He was called “Ashot the Compassionate” because of
his love of the people and his numerous charitable provisions for their
benefit. It was said that he would never dine without sending for some
beggars out of the street to share the meal with him.
The most renowned as well as the wisest and most
powerful king of this dynasty was Gagik I. (990–1020), under whom
the country enjoyed its period of greatest prosperity.
The danger of the Arabs was past, but now a new peril
threatened the East, that of the Seljukian Turks, who came from Central
Asia in search of a new country. Persia and Mesopotamia fell before
them and they entered Armenia. Several of the Armenian princes offered
them stout resistance with some success, but, fearing that this success
was only temporary, others transferred themselves and their subjects to
more secure parts of the country.
The Seljuks conquered Persia and established a Persian
kingdom of their own, but the new Persia was no longer Zoroastrian, but
Mohammedan. Armenia again became a battlefield. The Greeks also claimed
the city of Ani, and this led to many conflicts in which the Armenians
made a brave defence. The town, however, fell through treachery and the
Greeks devastated some parts of the country, treating the inhabitants
no better than the Arabs and the Seljuks had done. In order to weaken
the power of Armenia, they also made attempts to exterminate the native
princes and nobles.
About the same time, the Seljuks again invaded Armenia
and completed the desolation which the Greeks had begun. They wrought
great destruction in Ani.
The last king of the Bagratuni dynasty was unable to
re-establish his kingdom and was killed by the Greeks. His two sons and
his grandson were poisoned. So ended the race of the Bagratuni whose
dynasty had lasted 160 years.
During the rule of this house, the country had a period
of rest and the energies of the people were directed to the restoration
and development of the country. The ruined monasteries and churches
were rebuilt, schools were again established; commerce, arts, and
handicrafts throve. This was a particularly flourishing time for the
national architecture, which now assumed a new character. Most of the
Armenian abbeys and churches were built during [200]this time, and as these places had always
been seats of learning, alternative erudition revived, original writing
and the transcription of manuscripts going on briskly within the
convent walls. The literature of this period is chiefly of a religious
character. In it we see traces of Arabic influence—the influence
of the eighth century, when Arabic literature was at its zenith. The
chief debt of Armenian literature to the Arabs is the introduction of
rhyme, which is first found in Armenian verse in the eleventh
century.
In dealing with this period, as we are only concerned
with Armenian poetry, we must leave unmentioned the historians and
other famous prose writers.
The most remarkable Armenian poet under the Bagratuni
dynasty was Grigor Narekatzi (951–1009),
who has been called the Pindar of Armenia and has also been canonised
as a saint. From his pen came elegies, odes, panegyrics, and homilies.
His sacred elegies (ninety-five in number) are elevated in style,
showing Arabian influence, and very pure in sentiment. His canticles
and melodies are still chanted in the Armenian Church. Verbosity is a
characteristic of his work; in one passage the word “God”
is accompanied by ninety adjectives.
He was greatly loved and revered by the people, but he
aroused jealousy in some of his ecclesiastical colleagues. On one
occasion, they went to the Catholicos with accusations against him. The
Catholicos appointed priests to investigate the case. These priests
repaired to the abbey where Grigor Narekatzi was, arriving about dinner
time on a Friday. To their surprise they found roast pigeons on the
table, and reminded Grigor that it was fast-day, whereupon the latter
said, addressing himself to the pigeons: “If that be so, off with
you!” and the roasted birds took to themselves wings and flew
away. The astonished investigators, without going into the case, turned
back and reported the miracle to the Catholicos. Of course this is an
extravagant legend, but it shows the high estimation in which Grigor
Narekatzi was held by his contemporaries.
The greatest work of this writer and the one on which
his fame rests is Narek. It is divided into ninety-five
chapters, and is a tragic devotional monologue composed of poetical
prayers. Here the author reveals his heart and soul in converse with
God. Hope, fear, love, faith, repentance, entreaty, aspiration, breathe
as if mingled with tears in fine and noble lines and periods. There is
a copious stream of epithets, a flood of rhetoric, an unfailing flow of
ideas. With all this wealth of diction, this work is sincere and
strikingly original, and gives evidence of the author’s
high-soaring imagination. He begins with an address to God, in which he
represents himself as one of the vilest of creatures, saying that, if
all the trees in all the forests of the world were pens and all the
seas ink, they would not suffice to write down [201]his sins, but towards even such sinfulness
as this the mercy of God is great, and the Creator is so powerful that
it will be possible for Him to bleach the sins as white as snow.
This work gives evidence that its author had, on the one
hand, great love of God and a firm faith, and on the other hand a vivid
imagination and poetic fire. All this he has worded together with great
skill.
Narek is a mingling of prose and verse. It begins
in prose and then breaks into verse, then again, after continuing to
some length, returns to prose, and so on. It was printed for the first
time in 1673 at Constantinople; in all thirty editions have been
published in different places. It stands by itself, being the only long
mystic work in Armenian literature, mysticism being quite alien to the
typical Armenian mind. Even the mysticism of Narek and a few
other works of the same period has its own peculiarities. It is not so
obscure as ordinary mysticism, partaking, rather, of the nature of
allegory. Notwithstanding its unusual character, Narek was
formerly regarded with veneration little short of that accorded to the
Bible itself. Within recent times superstitious people ascribed to it
miraculous medical qualities, believing that if certain chapters were
read over a patient he would be cured. It was also believed that if any
one read certain chapters—forty in number—with concentrated
attention, banishing thought of everything else, he would have the
power of controlling devils, but this it is said is very difficult and
even dangerous, because while the reading is going on, evil spirits
come and try to distract the mind of the reader, annoying, terrifying,
and even torturing him; if his attention wanders, he may become
possessed. All this shows the value and importance that were attached
to Narek. At the end of this work, the author states that he
finished writing it in the year 1001–2. Gregory of Narek also
wrote several songs. Some of his prayers and sharakans are used
in the church services. Another great writer of this period was Grigor
Magistros (—— -1058) who produced poetry of some value. He
was of princely lineage and, unlike the Armenian authors who were his
predecessors or contemporaries, he was a layman. He gained reputation
as a linguist, a scholar, and a writer, and was one of the greatest
politicians of his time. He received the title of “duke”
from the Greek emperors Constantine and Monomachus. Early in life he
gave up politics and retired to his estate, where he devoted himself to
literary pursuits. He wrote both poetry and prose. His chief poetical
work is a long metrical narration (a thousand lines in extent) of the
principal events recorded in the Bible, from the Creation to the
Resurrection of Christ. The author states that this work was written in
three days at the request of a Mohammedan noble who wished to make
acquaintance with the Christian Scriptures and who, after reading the
poem, became converted to Christianity. Grigor Magistros was almost the
first poet to adopt the use of rhyme, introduced [202]into Armenia by the Arabs. In his work
Grigor Magistros tells some interesting stories which he has learnt
from the peasants. One is the following. The lark, fearing that heaven
would fall down, lay on her back, stretching up her feet towards the
sky, thinking she would thus prevent the catastrophe. Some laughed at
her and said, “With your spindle legs, you want to become a tree,
O bird, with a mind capacious as the sea.” The lark replied,
“I am doing what I can.”
At the end of the eleventh century, chronicles and
histories were written in ancient Armenian (Grabar), but there
was also a language of the people, in which books for popular use, such
as collections of medical recipes, began to be written at this period,
as well as songs. When the country again lost its independence many
migrations took place. It was not only peasants and citizens who
migrated; some of the nobles also sought more secure dwelling places in
mountainous districts. The majority of these settled in the region of
the Taurus Mountains, and there the emigrants multiplied to such an
extent that they equalled the Greeks in number. In their new home they
built many churches and abbeys, where they educated the boys of the
settlement. Soon they established a number of villages and small towns,
and the princes set up fortresses. The Byzantine emperors rather
encouraged this progress, as they thought that the existence of small
buffer-states on their frontier would serve as a barrier against the
attacks of Mohammedan countries. One of these princes, Rubin by name,
established himself there in 1080. He chose an impregnable stronghold,
and the Armenians of the neighbourhood came and put themselves under
his protection. Other Armenian princes, settled in the surrounding
districts, adopted him as their chief. Having concentrated and
strengthened his power, he ruled his little realm—which was
called, after him, the Rubinian Principality—with great wisdom
for fifteen years. He was succeeded by his son, Constantine, in 1095.
Constantine extended his dominions by taking some almost impregnable
fortresses from the Greeks. During his reign many Europeans began to
come, with their armies, to the East. They wore the badge of the cross
on their arms, and were therefore called “Crusaders.” They
cleared Palestine and Syria of Mohammedans and set up new Christian
principalities in those countries. The Armenians called these strangers
“Latins” because they were all Catholics of the Roman
Church. Constantine rendered great services to the Crusaders by
furnishing them with guides, providing them with provisions, etc., and
the European princes, as an acknowledgment, conferred on him the title
of “marquis.”
The successors of Constantine extended still further the
boundaries of the principality. After gaining possession of the
mountains and strongholds, they came to the plains of Cilicia and
imposed their rule as far as the sea-coast. At this time the Byzantine
Empire was very [203]weak, and the Mohammedan
Seljuks and Arabs were not very strong, as they had become divided
among themselves and were engaged in strife with one another. The
Crusaders had also formed new Christian principalities in those
regions, so that the Rubinians had no fears either of Mohammedans or of
any other foe. Precisely one hundred years after the accession of Rubin
I., the Armenians possessed the extensive reach of territory between
the Taurus Range and the sea, where they had built many fortresses,
towns, and even ports.
Leo II. (1185) succeeded in repelling the attacks of the
Sultan of Damascus and other Mohammedan rulers, even taking some towns
from them.
During this period, Saladin, Sultan of Egypt, taking
advantage of dissension among the crusading princes, attacked them, and
took Jerusalem and the rest of Palestine (1187).
Then a new Crusade was started, led by the German
Emperor Frederick Barbarossa. This monarch sent emissaries to Leo,
asking his help against the Mohammedans, promising him a crown as a
reward. Leo supplied the Crusaders with provisions and rendered them
other assistance. Barbarossa died without fulfilling his promise, but
the crown was sent by his successor, Henry VI., after consultation with
the Pope of Rome. Leo was crowned king in 1198. The following year, the
new Armenian king also obtained recognition from the Byzantine Emperor,
who sent him a crown. Leo still further extended his dominions and put
the whole kingdom into excellent condition. He did not, like the
Bagratunis, re-establish the régime of the Arsacidae, but tried
to imitate European institutions, inviting many French, English, and
German experts to his kingdom, giving them appointments in the court,
the army, and the council. Many new schools were opened in this reign
in which the teaching was entrusted to learned Europeans as well as to
Armenians.
Arts and handicrafts, commerce and agriculture also
flourished under this king. Leo died in 1219 after a reign of
thirty-four years. For his great services to his people, he was called
“Leo the Benefactor.”
It was under the rule of this king that Armenia entered
into close relations with Europe. Just as the Zoroastrian Persians and
afterwards the Greeks had inflicted all kinds of persecutions on the
Armenians in order to convert them to their religions, so also in the
reign of Leo II. and for many years afterwards the popes of Rome did
everything possible to make the Armenians join their Church. The popes
promised the Armenians help against the Mohammedans, they even offered
to organise a Crusade, but the first condition was that the Armenians
should become Catholics. When the Armenians did not accept these
advances, a number of Catholic priests came to Armenia and tried to
convert them. These priests were called “Unitors.” At this
time the Tartars (who were heathens) became very strong and conquered
[204]Persia. The Armenian king when this conquest
took place was Hetum. This king, though he maintained friendly
relations with the courts of Europe, attached little weight to promises
emanating from these quarters; he therefore formed an alliance with the
Tartars against the Mohammedans. He tried to indoctrinate his new
allies in Christian ideas and almost effected their conversion to
Christianity. That he did not quite gain his object is due to external
causes. Hetum, in conjunction with the Tartars, fought successfully
against many Mohammedan sultans, but the Egyptian mamelukes grew strong
and the Tartars became Mohammedans (1302), whereupon enmity arose
between them and the Armenians. Three Mohammedan races—Seljuks,
Tartars, and mamelukes—one after another attacked Cilicia,
devastating the country and plundering many towns. The Armenians asked
assistance from the Pope and from European kings; help was promised
from France, but it never came, so the Tartars conquered Cilicia and
slew its king, who, however, was avenged by his youngest brother,
Ashin, who collected an army and drove the Tartars out of the country
(1308).
The Mohammedan kingdoms became very powerful at this
time. The mamelukes dominated, besides Egypt, Arabia, Palestine, and
Syria as far as the Euphrates.
The common aim of all the Mohammedan governments was to
destroy the independent kingdom of Armenia, because it was the only
Christian state in Asia that was capable of rendering assistance to
European sovereigns should any of them enter on a new Crusade in order
to gain possession of the Holy Sepulchre. When the mamelukes heard that
the European states were planning a new Crusade, they formed an
alliance with the Tartars and the Sultan of Iconia and devastated
Cilicia. But the Armenians made a brave defence and the mamelukes
granted a peace for fifteen years. By this peace it was agreed that the
King of Armenia should pay a certain amount of tribute and the
mamelukes should restore the places they had taken. Again there was
talk of a Crusade, and the Sultan of Egypt again attacked Cilicia. Leo
V. (King of Armenia) asked for help from Europe, but the only
assistance given was 10,000 florins sent by the King of France and a
few sacks of corn from the Pope. This was not what the Armenians
wanted; in fact they were again left to their fate. The Mohammedan
sultan offered to restore Leo’s kingdom if he would swear on the
Cross and the Gospels that he would have no dealings with the
Crusaders. Leo V. died in 1341, and as he had no children the throne
passed to the Lusignan dynasty.
There were only four kings of this dynasty: the last
king was Leo VI. (1365–1375). He was taken prisoner when the
sultan invaded and devastated Cilicia. Thus ended the kingdom of
Armenia. After a few years, through the mediation of John, King of
Castille, Leo was set at liberty. He came to Europe to ask for help in
regaining his kingdom. There was a talk of [205]a Crusade specially on behalf of the
Armenians, but it never went beyond the stage of promises, and the last
King of Armenia died in Paris in 1393 and is buried there in the Abbey
of St. Celestin.
We have spoken mostly of Cilicia during this period. If
we wish to complete the picture of the devastation of Armenia, we must
name Zenghis Khan, Tamerlane (1387), and other enemies of the human
race, but we will not enter into particulars of their work of
desolation.
The period whose history we have sketched (twelfth to
fourteenth centuries), especially the two former centuries, is called
the Silver Age of Armenian literature. The independence of Armenia gave
a breathing space which facilitated the production of literary works.
This is the period of the revival of learning and also the period when
Armenia came in contact with the countries of Western Europe and became
acquainted with Western civilisation.
Catholicos Nerses, surnamed
“the Gracious,” is the most brilliant author of the
beginning of this period (1100–1173). He was the great-grandchild
of Grigor Magistros, and his brother Grigorios was Catholicos before
him. His songs and sharakans are greatly loved by the people and
some of the latter are sung in the churches. He was canonised as a
saint. Nerses was the first Armenian to write very long poems. He
followed his great-grandfather in using rhyme. There is a great variety
of metre in his works. As a rule his long poems are written in
eight-feet lines, the same rhyme being employed nearly throughout the
poem. This practice he abandoned in certain cases for, as he himself
remarks, “it might tire the reader”! He has also poems
written in couplets of short lines, which are the most musical and
successful of his works. Some of his poems have peculiarities of their
own. He sometimes begins the lines of the first stanza with A, those of
the next with B, and so on in alphabetical order, or he uses the same
letter for the beginning of the first line and the conclusion of the
last. He also sometimes makes metrical acrostics of his own name. Of
course these contrivances were in common use in his time. Sometimes he
makes acrostics of the titles or names in dedications of his poems. But
these artificialities do not spoil the poem or give the impression of a
tour de force, in fact they are so unobtrusive that they might
easily escape the reader’s notice. In all he has written 15,000
lines.
One of his long poems entitled Jesus the Son
consists of 4000 eight-feet lines. These lines, with very few
exceptions, end with the Armenian syllable -in. Some of the
songs in this poem are very beautiful and are sung in churches.
Another of his long poems is an elegy on the Fall of
Edessa which was taken from the [206]Crusaders
by the Turks in 1144. This is an allegory: the town itself recounts its
misfortunes and addresses itself to other cities of the world, to the
mountains, to the seas, and begs them not to judge her by what she is
in her present condition, but assures them that she was once a crown
bearer and in a most happy state, but now she is in mourning, and
misfortune has befallen her. As Nerses was a contemporary of the event
which forms the subject of the poem, the latter has an historical
value, being a first-hand source of information relating to the times
of the Crusaders.
Nerses also wrote a long poem narrating the history of
Armenia from the days of Haik up to his own time. Leo III., one hundred
and fifty years after the poet’s death, asked the bishop Vahram
Rabun to continue the poem from the death of Nerses to his own time
(1275), thus giving the annals of the Rubinian dynasty. In writing this
sequel, in 1500 lines, he said: “It is a bold act to continue the
work of Nerses the Gracious,” but he adds that, knowing that with
gold thread embroidery black threads are sometimes introduced, he
consented to undertake the labour.
It is not within our province here to describe the great
work achieved by Nerses in other directions, but he was much beloved by
his people and has left an immortal name as the greatest personality of
his age. We only here record one incident to show the breadth of his
ideas. In the town of Edessa pestilence was raging and sufferers from
the disease were taken out of the town and segregated. It was
considered hopeless to cure them, as it was believed that the disease
came as a punishment from God. Nerses sent out an epistle to the
plague-stricken people, offering them consolation, saying that, in
compensation for their suffering, they would receive eternal bliss. In
this letter, he declares that the disease was not sent from Heaven as a
punishment and people should not avoid the sick; on the contrary, it
was their duty to care for their brethren when they were in distress,
and he assured them that, with patience and right treatment, it was
possible to get rid of the disease.
This counsel made an immense impression on the people,
as they had the word of the Catholicos that this was not a heaven-sent
chastisement; they nursed the patients and in a short time the
pestilence was stayed.
This idea of Nerses, though it is now commonly held, was
very remarkable in the age in which he lived. Nerses the Gracious is
considered the Fénelon of Armenia. Some of his elegies are
perfect gems of poetic art. One of his prayers is divided into
twenty-four verses, according to the twenty-four hours, one verse to be
used each hour, but, seeing that this is sometimes impracticable, he
says that it might be read in three portions of light verses in the
morning, at noon, and at night. If this division is also impossible, he
recommends that it [207]should be read in two
portions, in the morning and evening. This prayer has been translated
into thirty-six languages, of which English is one.
An example of the work of Nerses the Gracious, entitled
“The Arrival of the Crusaders,” is given in this volume on
page 58.
This is hardly a representative poem and is not the best
specimen of the author’s work. It was inserted because of the
interest of the Crusades for Europeans. The gems of his work may be
found among the sharakans, which we can say without hesitation
will bear comparison with any work of this class in any language of the
world. Unfortunately, it is impossible to do justice to these hymns in
a translation. Nerses also wrote verses for children, and riddles, both
in the vernacular.
In general, his language is simple and expressive. He
also composed short fables, according to a contemporary historian; some
of these were recited at weddings and other festivals.
Mkhitar Gosh was the author of one hundred and fifty
fables, marked by good taste, purity, and elegance. He died in 1213. He
is called the Aesop of Armenia.
The following is a specimen of Mkhitar Gosh’s
fables: The owl sent matchmakers to the eagle, asking his daughter in
marriage, in these terms: “You are the ruler of the day; I am the
ruler of the night. It will be better for us to form an alliance by
marriage.”
The proposal was accepted.
After the wedding, the bridegroom could not see by day
and the bride could not see by night. Therefore the falcons ridiculed
them, and their marriage was unhappy.
This fable is meant as a warning against marriages
between Christians and pagans.
Many of Mkhitar Gosh’s fables are very original
and have a charm of their own.
Another famous fabulist was Vardan Aigektzi. His
collection of fables is called The Book of the Fox. Several
additions have been made to this work by later hands, so that the book
has no uniformity of style and some fables in the collection are
childish and trivial.
This is one of the fables in this book:
Mankind is like three fools. The first went to the tops
of the mountains trying to catch a wind, and take it home, but though
he tried a hundred years he never caught a wind that was as big as a
drop of rain. The second, taking with him a number of servants and a
great deal of money, sat down by the side of a river, trying to use its
waters as a tablet on which to inscribe an elegy, but he could not form
a word or trace a letter, though he laboured for a hundred years. The
third tried to surpass the others by undertaking two enterprises at
once. He had a huge bow made with arrows to match, and tried by night
to shoot at the stars and other heavenly bodies and bring them home,
that he alone might have light, but he could not catch [208]a spark. Besides this, during the day he ran
after his own shadow, but never caught it, though he tried for a
hundred years.
The moral of this fable is the futility of human life
and human endeavour. “Vanity of vanities; all is
vanity.”
Moses Kaghankatvatzi (seventh
century) mentions in his history some interesting fables. In one of
them, which arose when there was a great famine in the land, the story
is put into the mouth of a personification of the grain millet, whose
narrative is to this effect:—
“I, Millet, was lying in an unknown place in the
village of Kaku, in the province of Shakashen. All the purchasers
treated me with contempt and rejected me. Then came my brother, Famine,
and dominated the land. From that day I went and sat on the tables of
the King and the Catholicos.”
Armenian apologues and proverbial sayings are worthy of
attention. Here are a few characteristic specimens; some of these are
rhymed in the original, in others the contrasted words
rhyme:—
One fool threw a stone into a well; forty wise men were
unable to get it out.
He crossed the sea safely, and was drowned in a
brook.
They were reading the Gospel over the wolf’s head.
He said: “Hurry up! The sheep will get past.”
They asked the partridge: “Why are your feet
red?” “From the cold,” he replied. “We have
seen you in the summer as well,” they rejoined.
Are you the corn of the upper field? (Who are you that
you should be set above others?)
A black cat has passed between them. (Referring to
friends who have quarrelled.)
Whenever you touch a stone, may it become gold! (A
blessing.)
The donkey began its tricks on the bridge.
Light for others, fire for the house. (A saint abroad, a
devil at home.)
The black donkey is tied up at the gate. (A worthless
thing is always at hand.)
Here is a riddle by Nerses Shnorhali:—
I saw an outspread white tent, wherein black hens were
perched, that laid eggs of various kinds and spoke in human language.
(A book.)
Between the end of the thirteenth century and the
beginning of the fourteenth lived, almost contemporaneously, three
great poets, all ecclesiastics:—Constantine
Erzingatzi, Hovhannes Erzingatzi, and
Frik, who were almost the last singers of the
dying Armenian kingdom.
The first of these, Constantine
Erzingatzi, was born about 1250–1260 in [209]Erzingan. From early youth he showed poetic
talent and gained favour from the people, but incurred the jealousy of
his own associates. In one of his poems he says he cannot tell why his
enemies hate him and expresses a desire to know their reason.
Erzingatzi had a friend, a certain Amir Tol, who lived in Tabriz.
Erzingatzi used to send his poems, as he wrote them, to this friend,
who entered them in a book. The poems in this collection number
twenty-two. The manuscript is preserved in the library of St. Lazare,
Venice. The themes of Erzingatzi’s poems are—among other
things—the love of the rose and the nightingale, the beauty of
nature, the wedding of the flowers, spring, dawn, and morning. In his
love poems, he throws over his emotions a mystic veil of celestial hue,
and some of his lines rise to a higher level than ordinary amorous
verse. For him, love and beauty are one and the same. He says that one
who is without love has no sense of beauty. He calls his lady-love a
breeze of spring, and himself a thirsty flower, but a flower on which
only a hot southern blast is ever blowing, so that his love-thirst
continually endures. He likens his mistress to the radiant heavenly
bodies—the sun, moon, and stars—but her light is stronger
than that of all other luminaries, for it alone can illumine his
darkened heart.
Erzingatzi says that, if he is to have any share in the
life of love in this world, he will be content with one hour of
“morning love” that springs from the heart. For that he is
willing to exchange his life. He prays to God for such love, always
emphasising the word “morning.”
Among his works is a beautiful poem on Spring, which
begins with a hundred thousand thanksgivings for the blessing that has
flown down from heaven to earth:—
“It was dark and every stone was ice-bound; there
was not a green herb, but now the earth arrays itself anew. The winter
was like a prison, the spring like a sun that rises in the night.
Everything is merry and joyous; even the dew-bringing cloud thunders
gently, spanning the earth with its bow and causing many swift rivers
to flow, which, without distinction, throw into rapturous intoxication
all places of the earth.
“Terribly roar the streams that come down from the
mountains, but, after strolling to and fro among the meadows in loving
fashion, pass on to touch the face of the sea.
“The birds sing sweetly; the swallow chants
psalms, the lark comes, reciting the praise of the morning. All leap
into life—plants, birds, beasts with their offspring; they all
form themselves into one great flock and dance together. The flowers
have assembled in the garden. The Nightingale, proclaiming the glad
things of the great resurrection, also enters the garden, seeking the
Rose.
“When the time is ripe, she opens, and the other
flowers, when they see the splendour of [210]the Rose,
run off, over hill and dale, and, from fear, lose their colour. The
Nightingale is intoxicated with the sweet odour of the Rose. Then takes
place a festival of nature and the Rose sings her own
praise.”
The original text of this poem is a real achievement as
regards language, poetical expressions, and art, showing that
Erzingatzi was a master of his craft.
Erzingatzi was also the author of a long narrative poem,
called Farman and Asman, recounting the love adventures of a
Persian princess. This was composed at the request of a Syrian knight
and shows some traces of Persian influence.
Another long narrative poem of this writer, entitled
A Girl’s Questions, seems to owe something to Arabic
literature.
Erzingatzi is also the author of many didactic poems.
Here are a few stanzas from another of his poems:—
“Waken from your dreams
And behold, you that were sleeping,
How through all the night
They their sleepless watch are keeping.
Ever circling round
By the will of God who made them:
And heaven’s arches wide
To uplift and hold He bade them.
“I awoke from sleep
And a while I stood and waited.
When the long night passed,
When appeared the dawn belated,—
Many stars of light
Watching stood to greet the morning;
Servants of our God,
All the sky of night adorning.
“Then a Star arose
Near the Morning Star, in Heaven;
Fairer than all stars,
Radiance to that Star was given.
“When the moon beheld
She bade all the stars to vanish. [211]
All turned pale, and set,
As she spoke their light to banish.
Cleared was heaven’s face
And the sun arose in splendour;
Then a Child appeared,
Sweet the Name He had, and tender.”23
Hovhannes Erzingatzi
(b. 1250) was educated in a monastery on the confines of Georgia
and Armenia under a bishop who was renowned for his learning. He
returned to Erzingan in 1272 and travelled to Jerusalem in 1281, in the
course of his journey passing through Cilicia in order to visit the
Armenian royal seat, where King Leon was then reigning. By his learning
and talents he attracted the attention of the Catholicos, who appointed
him director of all the schools in the city.
By order of the Catholicos, he wrote a grammar,
remarkable for its dear and comprehensible style and language. He also
came under the notice of the king. At the annual horse race two of the
king’s sons were among the competitors. On this occasion
Erzingatzi made a speech, which left a great impression and gained him
recognition as an orator. In Cilicia he learnt Latin and made several
translations from that language into Armenian. He wrote many Biblical
commentaries, besides other religious and devotional works, as well as
treatises on astrology; but his fame rests chiefly on his verse. In
addition to religious and moral poems, he wrote love songs, and lays
relating to nature. In his ethical as well as in his love poems we find
quaint metaphors and similes.
As, for instance, in the following stanza, where our
poet seems to be forestalling Bunyan:—
“All my sins I once amassed
And sat down before them weeping.
When the caravan went past
With my load I followed, leaping.
Then an angel that we met,
‘Woful pilgrim, whither farest?
Thou wilt there no lodging get
With that burden that thou bearest.’”
In another poem, entitled “Like an Ocean is this World,” which appears on page 59
of [212]this volume, he uses the metaphor afterwards
employed in Donne’s Hymn to Christ and Tennyson’s
Crossing the Bar.
His love poems are exquisitely fresh and rich.
The aesthetic character of his love and his enthusiasm
for beauty are shown by his declaration, in one of the poems, after a
rapturous expression of his passion for a lady of whom he gives a
rich-hued word-portrait, that the only thing that keeps his feelings
within bounds is the knowledge that, after death, her face will wither
and its colours fade.
In 1284 he went to Tiflis, the capital town of Georgia,
where he gave, in the newly-built church, on the occasion of its
opening, a discourse on the movements of the heavenly bodies. This
subject had a great fascination for him and he treated it in a manner
that deeply impressed his hearers, including the king’s son who
was present. His discourse was not a sermon, but a poetical oration. On
the prince’s asking him to write a poem on the same subject, he
wrote one of a thousand lines. At the desire of another prince, he
composed another poem on the same theme.
Khachatur Kecharetzi (better
known by his pen-name, Frik) was a priest who
was born at the end of the thirteenth century and died about 1330. He
wrote many poems, several of which are of an allegorical character;
also laments on the state of his country, and several mystic and other
religious poems, as well as love songs; but his most characteristic
work is the poem addressed to God, asking why He is unmindful of the
terrible condition of the Armenian nation, and also enumerating the
inequalities of the world, showing how the wicked prosper and the
righteous suffer.
“If we are useless creatures” (he says)
“unworthy of Thy care, why dost Thou not entirely destroy
us?”
An extract from this long poem is given in this volume
on page xv.
At the close of the fourteenth century, the glory of
Cilicia vanished, as the Armenian kingdom became extinct, after an
existence of nearly three hundred years; and Armenia once more became
the scene of turmoil and bloodshed.
The fifteenth century opened with the invasion of
Tamerlane, when the country was again desolated and subdued. This was a
century of the overthrow of Eastern civilisation.
The Byzantine Empire, shaken from its foundation, was
dashed to pieces, and its capital, Constantinople, fell into the hands
of the Ottomans (1453), a new Mohammedan power, which aspired to become
master of the whole of Asia. The Turcomans and, later, the Persians,
tried to check the advance of the Turks into their territories. Hence
commenced a long series of [213]wars between the two
Mohammedan states which continued through four centuries, and Armenia
passed now into the hands of the one, now into the hands of the other.
The country was again the scene of war, wherein reigned desolation,
fire, and death.
After the occupation of Constantinople, Turkish
influence extended over most of the eastern part of Armenia.
From this time, migrations of Armenians out of their own
country into different parts of the world became more frequent.
Twenty years after the invention of printing (1476) a
grammar in many tongues was published in France, which contains several
pages in Armenian.
In 1512 the first Armenian printed book was issued in
Venice. After that Armenians set up presses in various countries.
Notwithstanding the political position of the country,
its poetry continued to flourish and assumed a definite character; and
the voices of the poets rose continually louder and louder. This
century, together with the two preceding and the two following ones,
forms a flourishing age for poetry.
The chief poets of this century are:—Hovhannes
Tulkourantzi, Mkrtich Naghash, Grigoris of Aghtamar, Nahapet Kouchak,
Arakel Sunetzi.
Hovhannes Tulkourantzi
(1450–1525) was Catholicos of Sis. He is a poet of the days of
spring, flowers, beauty, love. He wrote also moral and religious poems,
besides other things. He cannot understand how it is possible for one
who loves a beautiful woman to grow old and die.
“Whosoever loves you, how can he die? How can his
face grow pale in death?”
He sings of the sanctity of family life, warning his
readers against the strange woman “who brings torment and grief.
Even his lawful wife brought trouble to Adam; what then is to be
expected of the stranger?”
He has a striking poem on Death, which he addresses
thus:—
“There is nothing so bitter as thou, no
venom is more bitter; only Hell surpasseth thee, and it is thou who
bringest Hell in thy train. Solomon remembered thee, saying, ‘Of
what profit is my wisdom? Say not I am a King possessing gold and
treasures.’
“Alas, O death! thou hast a grudge against the
sons of Adam and thou avengest thyself on them.
“Thou didst not consider that Moses was a prophet,
nor art thou ashamed of assaulting David; thou takest even Father
Abraham; thou draggest King Tiridates from his throne; and thou
respectest not the Emperor Constantine.24
[214]
“If a hero is attended by 1000 horsemen and
arrayed in six coats of armour, thou shootest thine arrows at him and
bringest him down, then thou castest him into prison and before the
entrance thou placest a great stone.”
The poem continues:—
“Like an eagle flying far,
Forth on wide-spread wings thou farest;
All the strong ones of the earth
In thy wing-tips rolled thou bearest.”
In other poems we see his susceptibility to
passion and his sense of love’s power. In one of these poems he
depicts25 a bishop of 100 years old whose beard had turned
from white to yellow and who, when officiating at the altar, suddenly
uttered the name of a lady in his invocation before the cross.
Mkrtich Naghash was Archbishop
of Diarbekr. He lived when the country was in difficult political
circumstances. His talents were appreciated not only by Armenians, but
also by the Mohammedan rulers with whom, thanks to his tact, he
established friendly relations, whereby he was able to protect his
compatriots from many oppressions. He built a church, which he adorned
with beautiful pictures of his own painting. But, after the death of
the Mohammedan princes who were his patrons, tyranny and oppression
began again under their successors. He went to Byzantium to solicit aid
for his suffering countrymen, but returned disappointed.
Besides his artistic skill, he was a poet of
considerable merit. His poems are generally on moral and religious
themes—the vanity of the world, avarice, and so forth; he also
wrote songs of exile, and love songs.
In his poem on avarice he says that that vice is the
root of all evil: “Kings and princes are continually fighting
against one another, watering the country with blood. They destroy
flourishing towns; they drive the inhabitants into exile; and spread
desolation wherever they go; and all this is through
avarice.”
He goes on to specify other evils springing from this
sin.
In the love songs of Mkrtich Naghash, the Rose and the
Nightingale whisper to each other fiery love speeches complaining of
each other’s cruelty. Then they admonish each other not to let
their passion consume them, and sing each other’s praises.
This is an extract from one of his songs of exile:
“The thoughts of an exile from his [215]country
are wanderers like himself. If his mind is wiser than Solomon’s,
if his words are precious pearls, in a foreign land they bid him be
silent and call him an ignorant fool. His death is as bitter as his
life; there is no one to cross his hands over his heart; they laugh as
they cover him with earth; no mourner follows him to the grave. But I,
Naghash, say that an exile’s heart is tender. In a foreign land,
what is sweet seems gall; the rose becomes a thorn. Speak gently to an
exile; give him a helping hand, and you will expiate your sins which
rankle like thorns.”
These songs of exile (or pilgrim songs) are a special
feature of Armenian poetry and for ages have been written by various
poets. They are original and often quaint and express the feelings of
Armenians who live far from their native mountains and fields, showing
how they pine for the land of their birth, reflecting the natural
beauties of their fatherland, and their yearning for their hearth and
the dear faces of home.
In 1469 in the town of Mardin there was an epidemic of
smallpox, which caused many deaths. He thus describes one of the
victims: “A youth beautiful to see, the image of the sun; his
brows were arches; his eyes like lamps guiding him by their light. This
lovely child lay on the ground, writhing piteously, looking to right
and left, while the terrible Angel of Death was busily engaged in
loosing the cords of his soul. Then the boy cried, saying: ‘Pity
me and save me from the hands of this holy angel, for I am
young.’ Then he turned to his father, and asking help from him,
said: ‘There are a thousand desires in my heart and not one of
them fulfilled.’
“The father answered: ‘I would not begrudge
gold and silver for thy redemption; but these are of no avail. I would
willingly give my life for thine.’ In the end the light of the
child’s life was extinguished; the lovely hue of his face faded;
his sea-like eyes lost their lustre; the power of his graceful arm was
cut off.”
Here is a translation in verse of a poem on a mysterious
Flower:—
“All the lovely flowers that were
One by one have left and gone,
One Flower too there was that went
Mourned and wept by every one.
Sweetest fragrance had that Flower,
Scent that filled the earth and air,
So that all the flowers of earth
Sought in love this Blossom fair.
Some for this sweet Flow’ret’s sake
Paled and withered languidly; [216]
Many for this Flow’ret’s sake
Blossomed like the almond tree.
God Himself had sent that Flower,
But all did not know its worth.
He that gave took back His own,
Many wept upon the earth.
And the Flower went to a place
Where all flowers rejoiced and smiled;
Flowers of many a brilliant hue
With its sweetness it beguiled.
From its beauty other flowers
Borrowed lustre, and they glowed;
Every blossom in its kind
To that Flower knelt and bowed.”
Grigoris of Aghtamar was
born about 1418 and was Catholicos of Aghtamar, an island in the Lake
of Van, which has picturesque surroundings fit to inspire a poet; so
that it is not surprising that our Catholicos became a singer animated
by poetic fire, the exponent of love and beauty—of the
Nightingale and the Rose.
It is evident, from his works, that Grigoris had a great
love of life. We see this especially in a poem entitled The Gardener
and his Garden. The Gardener, says the poet, enters his garden
every morning and hears the sweet voice of the nightingale as he
examines the newly planted flowers of various colours. This beautiful
spot he surrounds with a hedge, bringing stones from the river, thorns
from the mountain. He has just built arbours, made a fountain,
introduced little running brooks, and planted vines, when, all of a
sudden, a voice utters the command: “Come out of thy
garden.” It is Death who beckons him out. He expostulates:
“I have not yet seen life and light; I have not yet seen the
fruit of the garden; I have not yet smelt the rose; I have not yet
drunk my wine or filled my casks; I have not plucked flowers for a
nosegay. I have not yet rejoiced over my garden.”
But his prayers are not heeded; obedient to the
unchangeable law of the universe, he at last capitulates to the Angel
of Death.
After describing the Gardener’s death and burial,
the poet goes on to tell what happens to the garden after its owner has
left it; the rose fades; the other flowers disappear; the hedge is
broken down, and what was once a lovely garden becomes a scene of
desolation.
This is his description of the face of his lady-love. He
likens her eyebrows to a sword; the sparkle of her eyes to a sharp
lance; her eyes to the sunlit sea. She is, he says, as straight
[217]as a willow; her lips are like harp strings;
her teeth, a row of pearls; her tongue is sugar; and, wherever she
rests, the place becomes a garden. She has fragrance sweeter than the
violet of the spring; she is like a white rose, pure and sweet, like a
newly opened flower; a young almond plant. Her face is red and white,
like an apple of the forest. She soars high, like a daring eagle. She
is brilliant as a peacock with golden feathers.
We have in this volume (page 52) a translation of one of
Grigoris’ longer poems, entitled “Concerning the Rose and
the Nightingale,” in which it is interesting to note
that—quaintly enough—the poet gives the text of a letter
sent with great pomp, by special messengers, to the Rose; adding the
consequence which followed, and the verbal answer returned.
The subject of the Rose and the Nightingale is a Persian
one originally, but the outstanding characteristics of the Armenian
versions consist in the refinements and subtleties of the feelings
described, the deference paid to the Rose, and the idea of continuity
and faithfulness in love. These feelings are minutely described in this
beautiful poem, and summed up in the Rose’s message to the
Nightingale on p. 56:—
“I cannot there return immediately;
A little he must wait, in patient wise:
But if his love is perfectly with me,
Tell him to look for it in Paradise.”
These ideals constitute the difference between the
mentality of Mohammedanism and Christianity.
Nahapet Kouchak was a fine poet
of the seventeenth century. He is called the Psalmist of Love. Although
there is a slight resemblance in style between his writings and those
of the Persian poets, his poetry is original. The works attributed to
him have only recently been published as a whole; they have been
translated into French and other languages, and greatly admired. Some
critics have placed him higher than Sadi and other Persian poets.
(Examples of his work are given on pages 4, 5, and 31.)
Arakel Sunetzi was the
Metropolitan of the province of Suni. He appears to have possessed a
thorough acquaintance with the writings of his time. His chief work is
the Book of Adam, a long narrative poem, telling the story of
the Fall in the style of a romance in which theology, lyrics, heroic
lays, and folklore are all fused together.
Adam, though because of his great love for his wife he
was inclined to yield to her petition, yet wavered, not knowing whether
to hearken to his spouse or to his Creator. “But his mind
[218]went with his eyes; he deserted God, but not
the woman; for, without Eve, half of his body was dead, and with the
other half it was impossible to live.”
Among the lyrics in this book is one entitled The
Rib, of which we subjoin two stanzas:—
“The rib is bow-shaped, so her face,
Sped by her looks, is like a dart;
Who gazeth on a woman’s grace,
No salve or drug can cure his smart.
“And for the rib is high and low—
One side is vaulted, one is round,
Her face doth love and sweetness show
Whilst in her heart fierce hate is found.”
Here is a passage from another poem of
Sunetzi’s entitled The Glory of the Saints, describing the
Resurrection:—
“Opened are the tombs;
Now rise the dead that long in dust have lain.
Decked with brilliant hues,
Bright as the sun, they cannot fade again.
While the earth, renewed,
Doth greet the Lord, all fresh and dazzling white;
And the heavens are decked
More richly than before, sevenfold more bright.
Then in heaven shines forth
With arms stretched out like rays, the Holy Rood.
With the Cross appear
The hosts of fire—a countless multitude.
Butterflies dance forth
Amongst the angels—none may mark them
out.”
In the sixteenth century, Turkish and Persian wars
became fiercer and the Armenian history of this century becomes the
record of the sufferings of the country during these wars. Poets of
this period were Nerses Mokatzi, Minas Tokhatzi, Ghazar of Sebastia,
Sarkavak Bertaktzi.
Nerses Mokatzi was an
ecclesiastic and poet. Very few of his works have come down to us. One
of the poems we have—entitled The Dispute between Heaven and
Earth—is interesting. The poet begins by saying that Heaven
and Earth are brothers. One day these [219]brothers
disputed as to which of them was the greater. “Of course,”
says the poet, “the Heaven is high, but the Earth is more
fruitful.”
He then goes on to report a dialogue between the
brothers in which each enumerates his own possessions, declaring them
superior to those of the other. The following is a short prose summary
of this dialogue:—
Heaven.
Surely I possess more than you. The stars, with their
radiance, are all in my domain.
Earth.
The flowers, with their six thousand colours, are in
mine.
Heaven.
If I withhold my dew, how will your flowers array
themselves?
Earth.
You derive your dew from the sea, which originates in
me. If I cut off the source of the sea, how would you get your dew?
Heaven.
I have something else that you have not: should I veil
my sun your flowers would fade.
Earth.
Oh, I will bring forth waters from my abyss to keep my
flowers alive.
Heaven.
The lightning and the hail could destroy your flowers if
I willed it so.
Earth.
I have mountains and valleys that would intercept them
and shield the flowers.
Heaven.
All brave and wise men are buried in your depths.
Earth.
When God recalls the souls that are His, what is to be
done? If I did not receive and conceal their bodies, the angels would
flee from the deathly odour, and Heaven and Earth would be shaken.
Heaven.
The Nine Orders of Angels are all here with me.
Earth.
In my realm are the Apostles and Prophets.
Heaven.
I am the Heaven of Seven Regions; the Sun, the Moon, and
the Creator-God sitting on His throne all have their abode in me.
Earth.
Your Seven Regions will be shaken from their foundation.
The Sun, the Moon, and the Stars will be cast into the darkness and
your Creator-God, with His throne, will descend to me. The Judgment
will be held in my domain.
“Heaven then bent down its head
To the Earth in adoration,
You too, children of the Earth,
Bow to her in adoration.
What is higher than the Earth?
Praise and love bring to enwreathe her.
For to-day we walk on her
And to-morrow sleep beneath her.”26
[220]
This poem is interesting, as it breathes the spirit of
the revival of popular poetry, with its worship of nature, beauty, and
love, of which things the Earth is the personification. Hence the poet
exalts Earth above Heaven. Here we see also a change of ideas. The
older Christian poets were churchmen and sang contempt of the present
world and concentration on the joys of heaven. This new note, struck
from the beginning of the fifteenth century, gradually grows bolder,
and sounds forth daringly, as we hear it in this poem, which seems all
the more remarkable when we remember that its author was a priest. This
is the song, not of a lover of vanities, but, rather, of an enthusiast,
who loves beauty and has learnt that it is good to live on the earth,
because it also contains beautiful things that are worth living for.
This poem also shows the conquest of learning and science which, at the
time it was written, had found their way into Armenia as well as
elsewhere, perhaps through the new Armenian colonies formed in Europe
and other parts of the world.
Minas Tokhatzi, a humorous poet,
lived in Poland. He wrote verses on Toothache and on Tobacco
(descanting on its objectionable odour and showing how the smoker
becomes its slave); also on Flies.
To convey an idea of his art, we give the substance of
the last-named work:—
“The flies,” says the poet, “for some
reason or other, went forth to combat against me. They also entered
into a conspiracy with my penknife. Knowing of this, I implored the
knife not to listen to the accursed insects, who had already caused me
enough pain. The attack was begun in a novel fashion; the flies came,
buzzing, in gay and merry mood, and settled on my hands and arms in a
friendly manner, asking me to write them something in red ink. At the
same time, the penknife, playing me a perfidious trick, cut my hand. I
[221]protested against this treatment. The
penknife justified itself by saying it had acted thus because I had
told a lie. I got a few moments’ rest, after this, from the
flies, till, at dinner-time, I met with three of them, who announced
that more were coming. The combat was renewed. During the night, the
flies were relieved by their allies, the fleas.”
Ghazar of Sebastia, an
ecclesiastic, has fallen under the spell of some eyes “as deep as
the sea.” He describes the torment under which he is pining away
and his longing for his mistress’s arrival, like the longing of a
patient for his physician. The face of his love (he says) is like
glistening amber; her eyes are so bewitching, that
“The sun and moon have unto thee come down,
Lovingly on thy locks they hang, and gleam;
And clustering stars thy beauteous forehead crown,
Aflame and drunken with thy love they seem.”
There is nothing known of Sarkavak Bertaktzi, but this poem from his pen is
interesting:—
“O vine, you should commended be
For you are beautiful to see;
Your fruit is of all fruits most fair:—
The crown and diadem they wear.
Like strands of gold your branches spread,
Like ropes of pearl the grapes they thread.
For some are dark and some are white,
And some are red, transmitting light.
Some glow like amber in the dusk,
Perfumed with frankincense and musk.
Left us by the Creator’s care,—
From Eden’s fields a keepsake rare.
To us on earth you seem to be
The fruit of immortality.
To Noah you were by angels borne
His heart to gladden and adorn.
Your fruit when gathered from the vine
Unto the wine-press we assign;
Your juice like crimson roses glows
And through the press in torrents flows.
Then into jars we pour the meath,
There without fire to boil and seethe.
How many kings around you press,
Your name how many princes bless! [222]
The Sovereign’s heart you fill with joy,
With power to conquer and destroy;
If he is wroth with any man,
And places him beneath his ban,
One drop of you immediately
Would move his heart to set him free.
The man that from his birth was blind,
Drinking of you, his sight doth find;
Of glorious cities he can tell,
Wherein his footsteps never fell.
The dumb, that halted in his speech,
To prate with fluency you teach.
More glibly than a parrot, he
Will jest and wanton dotingly.
At mass, within the sacred cup,
The holy priest doth raise you up.
Disease and pain through you will cease,
By you all sinners find release.
To town and village you are borne,
To convent, wilderness forlorn;
Where men do not your sparkle see,
No mass nor service can there be.”
The seventeenth century resembles its predecessor
as regards the political position of Armenia, except that the misery is
even greater.
During the last years of the eighteenth century, the
Russian conquest of Armenia began.
At the end of the eighteenth century an Armenian monk
named Mkhitar Sepastatzi established at St.
Lazare in Venice an Armenian Brotherhood, who devoted themselves to
literature. This Brotherhood is still in existence, and has a branch in
Vienna. During this period of more than a century its members have
printed hundreds of old MSS. of historical value. They have also
produced many works dealing with history and other branches of
learning, and translations of foreign classics, thus rendering a great
service to Armenian literature.
It will be remembered that Byron stayed at St. Lazare
and studied Armenian, He actually took part in the publication of an
Armenian-English dictionary and grammar.
For centuries music and song have become a joy to
Armenians through minstrels called ashoughs. Ashoughs are
invited to all weddings and other festivities, where they are the life
of the party and the makers of merriment. They sing also on the bridges
and in the squares, [223]and wander from courtyard
to courtyard. Their song is not always merry; it is sometimes sad,
sometimes even bitter. They always carry with them their saz or
tar or kamancha, oriental instruments, on which they
accompany their songs. Many of the ashoughs are blind. To be an
ashough is considered a high attainment. In order to acquire the
art, any one who aspires to become an ashough first observes a
fast of seven weeks, then goes to the monastery of Sourb
Karapet, which is the Parnassus of Armenian musicians. “Sourb
Karapet” is John the Baptist, who is the patron saint of Armenian
minstrels. In the Near East, ashoughs (who are mostly Armenians)
are greatly admired not only by Armenians, but by Persians, Turks, and
other races, as some of them sing in other languages besides Armenian.
Some ashoughs sing their own verses, but as a rule the songs are the
composition of a special class of poets. The songs of these other
ashoughs often reveal deep feelings and many of them are
high-class poems.
As a typical ashough author, I will only mention
Sayat Nova. His lyre attained extreme
sweetness; he combines all the vivid colouring of the East with soft
and refined shading. He was born in 1712. He was a special favourite at
the court of the Georgian king. In his own words, he “sat in the
palace among the beauties and sang to them,” but his songs seem
not merely to be poems in praise of court beauties, or for their
amusement; they seem an expression of the deep feelings of his heart. A
word-picture of his lady-love will be found on page 74 of this volume
(“Thy Voice is Sweet”).
His love is so intense that one sees at once that he is
capable of deep feelings and one is drawn to him; yet this love is pure
and unselfish. He describes his love as a sea and himself as a little
barque floating on it. For ten years he has wooed the lady as a prince,
but without success; he will not relinquish the pursuit of her, but
resolves now for seven years to pay court to her in the character of a
pilgrim-minstrel.
He is even content only to sleep on her doorstep. There
is something else that is a part of his life, namely, his
kamancha. He threatens to cut the strings of his instrument if
he is a week without seeing his beloved.
Once he comes face to face with his lady-love and
says:—
“What avails me now a physician? The ointment
burns, and does not heal the wound, but your medicine is a different
one.”
But she replies that she has no remedy for him. In
another poem he is in despair, and says:—
“Without thee, of what use is the world’s
wealth? I will don the habit of a monk and visit the monasteries one by
one. Perhaps in one of them I shall discover a way of redemption
[224]from my hopeless love.” (See
“Without Thee what are Song and Dance to Me?” on page 85 of
this volume.)
In another poem he expresses the wavering between
earthly and heavenly life, saying:—
“If one obeys the will of the soul, then the body
is offended. How shall I escape this sorrow?”
At last he carries out his declaration and becomes a
monk. He secludes himself from the world in a lonely monastery, far
away from Tiflis; but once he hears that a minstrel has come to that
city whom none can equal, whereupon he steals out of the monastery,
disguised as a layman, and taking his saz with him, goes to
Tiflis, enters into contest with the new minstrel, and conquering him,
saves the honour of his native town.
In 1795 Agha Mohammed Khan laid waste Tiflis and many
other towns of that region. His soldiers entered the monastery where
Sayat Nova was praying and commanded him to come out and become a
Mohammedan if he wished to save his life; but he replied, in verse,
that he was an Armenian and would not deny his Christ. He was therefore
martyred on the spot. Other poems of his appear on pages 35 (“I
have a Word I fain would say”), 14 (“I beheld my Love this
Morning”), 110 (“Thou art so Sweet”).
We have given specimens of mediaeval Armenian poetry; we
now proceed to indicate in outline its most striking
characteristics.
The theme of the Armenian pagan minstrels was the heroic
deeds of their country’s history. The adoption of Christianity
imparted to Armenian poetry a specific form and tone. At the same time
it was the revival of the old Armenian valour, which, strengthened by
the circumstances in which the Armenians lived, produced a religious
poetry of great purity of feeling, and of a depth and solemnity
unequalled by any other poetry of this class.
In the Middle Ages, the poetry gave expression to the
love and other emotions of the Armenian poets.
A new poetry of the now Mohammedan Persia written in
modern Persian came into being almost simultaneously with the Armenian
poetry of the Middle Ages.
Firdusi, Omar Khayyam, Sadi, Hafiz, with a splendid
retinue of less famed singers, made Persian the language of verse
which, together with Arabic poetry in its earlier stages, no doubt had
some influence on the Armenian poets of the Middle Ages; but this
influence affected form rather than spirit or character.
Armenian mediaeval poetry does not possess the burning
hues of oriental verse, and is [225]perhaps less
luxurious, but the grace, charm, ease, and fancy of the Armenian lays
are inimitable, and their originality and occasional quaintness are so
marked that one feels there is a magic in them. These characteristics
are the outcome of the mutual assimilation of eastern and western art,
so that the poetry of Armenia, like its language, its art, its Church,
stands by itself.
In comparing Armenian with Persian and Arabic poetry,
one must remember that the Armenians, as Christians, were not
polygamists; and that, to them, marriage was sanctified by the law of
God and man. This is what the great Persian poet Sadi says of women:
“Choose a fresh wife every spring, or every New Year’s day,
for the almanac of last year is good for nothing.” It would have
been impossible for any Armenian poet to entertain such an idea as
that.
Whereas women are so cheap in the eyes of the Persian
poet, Armenian girls endowed with beauty were considered by their
parents and the community very precious possessions, to be zealously
guarded, as they were in constant danger of attracting the attention of
their Mohammedan lords and being forcibly carried off into harems. This
fact had the effect of mingling compassion with the Armenian
poets’ admiration of a girl’s beauty and made them write
more feelingly of women.
It must also be remembered that, whereas Mohammedanism
looks upon woman as a soulless being, in the eyes of a Christian she
possesses a soul as precious as that of a man.
It is an interesting fact that love poems were written
by the clergy, often by ecclesiastics of high position, who, by the law
of the Armenian Church, are vowed to celibacy. One explanation of this
is that they were born poets, and only regarded love as one among many
feelings fitted to be the subject of verse. Their use of the first
person is only dramatic.
There are also many folksongs which differ, in style and
character, from the love-songs of poets. The spirit of these songs is
that of Armenian pagan poems. The following is an example of songs of
this class. It describes the adventure of a girl.
“I beheld a youth to-day
As at dawn I walked unheeding,
And the youth stopped on his way,
Struck my cheek, and left it bleeding.
Then my mother questioned me,
‘Who was it that struck you?’ saying,
‘’Twas a thorn, as near the
tree
With the roses I was playing.’
‘May the tree turn dry and sear
Which thy pretty cheek left bleeding!’
[226]
‘Mother, dear, oh, do not speak,
’Twas a youth that stopped to kiss it.
’Twas for luck he kissed my cheek,
If thou curse him he will miss it!’”
Armenian religious and devotional poetry has
characteristics of its own. This class of literature falls into two
divisions. In the first division are works of a purely literary
character written in old Armenian; in the second, works meant for
popular use, written in the language of the people. These latter are
written in a more familiar style, proverbs and paraphrases being often
introduced, in a picturesque fashion, which appeals to the
unlearned.
As an example of the popular class of literature we give
an extract from a poem about Gregory the Illuminator, who was cast by
King Tiridates into a well infested with serpents and other loathsome
creatures:—
“‘Take the saint and put him into the
prison where dragon-serpents are assembled.’
They took the saint and put him in the prison where the
dragon-serpents were assembled.
And the poisonous serpents inclined their tongues in
worship.
And said: ‘Pity us, O Saint Gregory, and hearken
to the complaint of us, dragon-serpents.
It is many thousands of years since we drank water from
the springs;
We have not drunk water from the springs, but only the
blood of condemned men.
We have eaten no green herbs, but only the flesh of the
condemned.’”
The poet goes on to tell how St. Gregory when he
came out of the well set free the dragon-serpents in answer to their
prayer.
This poem is very old, being written in the fifth or
sixth century at the latest. The metre is that of the pagan poets.
We cite here another poem of this class—an
allegorical description of Christ on the Cross:—
“A little Bird I saw—a peerless
One—
Upon the four-armed Sign, that peer hath none.
O Peerless One, who is like Thee, Thou Peerless
One?
Thou alone.
“Its silvery wings were of a matchless white
More brilliant than the sun’s clear, matchless
light.
O Matchless One, who is like Thee, Thou Matchless
One?
Thou alone.
[227]
“Piteous Its voice—a great, transcendent
sigh;
Mighty, as Gabriel’s transcendent cry.
Transcendent One, who is like Thee, Transcendent
One?
Thou alone.
“Within Its eyes, gem-like, unrivalled tears;
Surpassing those the morn unrivalled wears;
Unrivalled One, who is like Thee, Unrivalled One?
Thou alone.”
A characteristic species of Armenian poetry is the
lullaby. There are hundreds of old Armenian cradle-songs which are
still sung by mothers to their infants, and they are exquisitely dainty
and sweet.
Here are some stanzas from one of these
songs:—
“Thou art lovely, feet and all,
Whom wouldst have to be thy playmate?
Hush, the silver moon I’ll
call—
The bright star to be thy playmate.
“Crimson rose and petals wide,
Thou hast bloomed, our garden’s pride.
As many suns shine on thy years
As the leaves our garden bears.
“Oror, hush, the deer are here,
The deer have come from the hills so high,
Have brought sweet sleep to my baby dear,
And filled it in his deep, deep eye.”
There are series of Armenian folksongs for every
event in life—birth, marriage, death, and so on.
The following is a folksong of death, being the lament
of a mother over her dead son:—
“As to-night I walked alone
To the earth my ear inclining,
From the ground I heard a moan,—
My son’s voice I heard repining.
‘Do not leave me in the ground,
With the serpents round me crawling. [228]
“Food in plenty we have
found,”
To their young ones they are calling,
“From his ribs we’ll gnaw the
flesh,
From his eyes drink water
fresh.”’
All the night I found no rest,
I cried out, ‘Give me a knife,
I will plunge it in my breast,
I will have no more of
life!’”
Yet another feature of the literature of this
period is the contemporary history in verse. We come across metrical
narratives of great events written by those who experienced them. There
is a long and vivid description in verse, by an eye-witness, of the
siege of Constantinople. The poet is Abraham Vardapet.
There are also agricultural and craft songs, which are
sung by workmen over their labour.
These songs are adapted to the movements necessitated by
each occupation.
Another marked difference between Armenian and
Mohammedan literature is that Armenians are entirely free from the
fatalism which is a distinctive feature of the Mohammedan view of
life.
Sadi relates, in his Gulistan, the story of a
fisherman that gives the Mohammedan conception of Fate. This fisherman
had caught a fish which his strength did not allow him to drag to
shore. Fearing to be drawn into the river himself, he abandoned his
line, and the fish swam away with the bait in his mouth. His companions
mocked him, and he replied: “What could I do? This animal escaped
because his last hour, fixed by fate, was not yet come. Fate governs
all, and the fisherman cannot overcome it more than another, nor can he
catch fish, if fate is against him, even in the Tigris. The fish
itself, even though dry, would not die, if it were the will of
fate to preserve its life.” The poet adds: “O man! why
shouldst thou fear? If thy hour is not come, in vain would thy enemy
rush against thee with his lance in rest: his arms and his feet would
be tied by fate, and the arrow would be turned away, though in the
hands of the most expert archer.”
The spirit of Armenian poetry is neither despondent nor
fatalistic. Its songs are of dawn, of spring, of sunrise, of struggle;
not of sunset. And perhaps this clinging to hope and this desire to
live is the only secret of the survival of the Armenian nation.
Armenian poetry is the product of dwellers in a hill country. To them
mountains, deep valleys, clear skies, running brooks are familiar
every-day companions.
This brings us down to the Renaissance of Armenian
literature which took place almost simultaneously in Russia and Turkey,
but the field of modern Armenian literature is such a [229]wide one that we cannot attempt an analysis
of it here. There are, however, some examples of modern Armenian poetry
in this volume.
The occupation of the Armenian provinces by Russia in
1828, with the attendant emigration of thousands from Persia and Turkey
into Russian Armenia, strengthened the nation. National schools were
soon opened, supported by the Armenians themselves. An Armenian Academy
was established in Moscow in 1815 and a Seminary in Tiflis in 1826.
Many Armenians went to Moscow and Petrograd, and also to foreign
universities, especially to those of Germany, Switzerland, and France.
The educational revival produced a new era, and a new Armenian
literature came into being. Many Armenian newspapers and reviews were
founded and published in different places. Tiflis was the centre of the
literature and learning of Russian Armenia. A similar revival of
letters occurred in Turkish Armenia. In 1860 a national and
ecclesiastical constitution was granted to the Armenians in Turkey. For
Turkish Armenians the literary centres were Constantinople and Smyrna.
In the latter city, good work was done in translating western classics,
but Constantinople was the chief seat of Armenian culture in Turkey.
Thus Armenian literature became divided into two branches—Russian
Armenian and Turkish Armenian—each of which has its own
peculiarities of language, style, and tone. It was poetry that first
burst into bloom and reached maturity soonest. At first the
motifs of the poems were mainly national. The imagination of the
poets was kindled by the past, present, and future of Armenia, its
sufferings, its national beauty, its shortcomings. They looked forward
to a national regeneration. They were apostles of light, science,
learning; and pointed out new paths of national salvation. The result
of all this was the production of some beautiful national songs. These
songs are not triumphant anthems like those of other countries; they
are songs of suffering, but with a note of hope. Then Armenian poetry
developed a truer relation with what had been created in literature and
art, and the poets looked at things in a new way, and assumed new
poetical forms. It combined poetry and imagination with passionate
feeling for life and truth. Some of the poems of this period are of
exquisite workmanship, breathing the very spirit of the time.
As we have said, Armenian poetry of the nineteenth
century is so full of merit and of such intense interest that it would
be impossible to do it justice without writing at great length. We have
already exhausted the space at our disposal, and hope to devote a
separate work to it.
Persian and Arabic poetry are things of the past, but
Armenian poetry, like the Armenian nation, has an unquenchable
vitality, ever advancing towards new horizons, and soaring to loftier
heights. [231]
