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 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 how easily the work before us may have been touched up by a later hand in the seventh century. [38]
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 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 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.”
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. [39]
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 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 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. [40]
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 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 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 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 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.
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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. 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.” [41]
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 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 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. [42]
“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 depicts [43] 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 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; 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 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 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 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.” [44]
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 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! 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, 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 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 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!’ ‘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.
“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. “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 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.
CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX TO AUTHORS
Moses of Khorene, fifth century— PAGE Vahagn, King of Armenia, 10 Ara and Semiramis, 23 The Founding of Van, 33 Artashes and Satenik, 48 Artavasd, 65 Christ and Abgarus, 75
Folk Songs— The Exile’s Song, 1 The Apple Tree, 3 The Fox, the Wolf, and the Bear, 15 The Song of the Stork, 27 The Song of the Partridge, 36 The Hawk and the Dove, 63 Charm Verses, 67 O’er the Mountains High He went, 81 The Fox, 90 Dance Song (Haberban), 101
Author Unknown, mediaeval— Yesternight I walked Abroad, 7
Saint Gregory of Narek, 951–1009— The Christ-Child, 113
Saint Nerses Shnorhali, 1102–1173— The Arrival of the Crusaders, 58
Hovhannes Erzingatzi, b. 1260— Like an Ocean is this World 59
“Frik,” d. 1330— Reproaches, xv
John Gower, d. 1408— The Tale of Rosiphelee, 91
Hovhannes Tulkourantzi, 1450–1525— Concerning Death, 119
Grigoris of Aghtamar, fifteenth century— Concerning the Rose and the Nightingale, 52
Nahabed Kouchak, fifteenth century— My Heart is turned into a Wailing Child, 4 O Night, be long, 5 Birthday Song, 31
Sayat Nova, 1713–1795— I beheld my Love this Morning, 14 I have a Word I fain would say, 35 “Thy Voice is Sweet”, 74 Without Thee what are Song and Dance to Me?, 85 Thou art so Sweet, 110
Leo Alishan, 1820–1901— The Lily of Shavarshan, 37 The Nightingale of Avarair, 108
Mikael Nalbandian, 1829–1866— Liberty, 12
Muggurdich Beshigtashlian, 1829–1868— Spring, 89
Raphael Patkanian, 1830–1892— Cradle Song, 21 Cradle Song, 41 The Tears of Araxes, 69
Raffi, 1837–1888— The Parrot’s Song, 78 The Lake of Van, 86 Ballad, 103 The Castle of Anoush, 114
Karekin Srvanstian, 1840–1892— Lament over the Heroes fallen in the Battle of Avarair, 25
Smpad Shahaziz, 1840–1897— The Dream, 46
Thomas Terzyan, 1842–1909— The Chragan Palace, 44
Elia Demirjibashian, 1851–1908— The Song of the Vulture 98
Bedros Tourian, 1852–1872— The Little Lake, 18 My Death, 50 Complaints, 82 A Day after, 84 Love One Another, 121
William Watson, b. 1858— A Trial of Orthodoxy, xvi
Hovhannes Hovhannessian, b. 1869— Spring, 20 The Rock, 60 Araxes came devouringly, 77
Hovhannes Toumanian, b. 1869— The Crane, 62 Earth and Sky, 79
Alexander Dzadourian, b. 1870— The Armenian Poet’s Prayer, 43
Arschag Tchobanian, b. 1872— Happiness, 118
Avetis Isahakian, b. 1875— Black Eyes, 6 Huntsman, that on the Hills above, 11 Ye Mountain Bluebells, 29 The Sun went down, 30 The Wind is howling through the Winter Night, 42
Shushanik Gourghinian, b. 1876— The Eagle’s Love, 51
Zabelle Essayan, b. 1878— Incense, 17
C. A. Dodochian— The Wandering Armenian to the Swallow, 111
Hovhannes Costaniantz— No Bird can reach the Mountain’s Crest, 106
Derenik Demirjian— The Eve of Ascension Day, 73
Haroutune Toumanian— Morning, 32
Vittoria Aganoor Pompilj, d. 1910— Pasqua Armena, 122 “Io Vidi”, 123
INDEX TO FIRST LINES
AUTHOR. TRANSLATED BY PAGE
Above the waters, like a hoary giant Hovhannes Hovhannessian Z. C. Boyajian 60 Accostarsi all’oscuro Vittoria Aganoor Pompilj 123 A great black bird like to a great black cloud Elia Demirjibashian Z. C. Boyajian 98 An eagle sat upon the fell Shushanik Gourghinian Z. C. Boyajian 51 Araxes came devouringly Hovhannes Hovhannessian Z. C. Boyajian 77 Armenian maidens, come and view Leo Alishan Alice Stone Blackwell 37 Belovèd one, for thy sweet sake Folk Song Z. C. Boyajian 1 Dark forests clothe the mountain-side Raffi Z. C. Boyajian 103 Day dawned. Bright tongues of scarlet flame Haroutune Toumanian Z. C. Boyajian 32 Do not trust black eyes, but fear them Avetis Isahakian Z. C. Boyajian 6 Farewell, thou Sun, and Thou, O Power Divine Bedros Tourian Z. C. Boyajian 82 Have you ever seen that wondrous building T. Terzyan Alice Stone Blackwell 44 Huntsman, that on the hills above Avetis Isahakian Z. C. Boyajian 11 I beheld my love this morning Sayat Nova Z. C. Boyajian 14 If Goghtan’s bards no longer crown Karekin Srvanstian Z. C. Boyajian 25 I have a word I fain would say Sayat Nova Z. C. Boyajian 35 I have loved your winsome face Folk Song Z. C. Boyajian 101 In many a distant, unknown land 47 I walk by Mother Arax Raphael Patkanian Alice Stone Blackwell 69 Like an ocean is this world Hovhannes Erzingatzi Z. C. Boyajian 59 My heart is turned into a wailing child Nahabed Kouchak Z. C. Boyajian 4 Nightingale, oh, leave our garden Raphael Patkanian Alice Stone Blackwell 41 Night with her ebon hair and starry Derenik Demirjian Z. C. Boyajian 73 crown No bird can reach the mountain’s crest H. Costaniantz Z. C. Boyajian 106 None await thy smiling rays Hovhannes Hovhannessian Z. C. Boyajian 20 Non fu di fiele abbeverato? Il petto Vittoria Aganoor Pompilj 122 O’er the mountains high he went Folk Song Z. C. Boyajian 81 O evil man, with passions fraught Hovhannes Tulkourantzi Z. C. Boyajian 119 Of Armenye, I rede thus John Gower 91 O God of righteousness and truth “Frik” xv O God, ’tis not for laurel wreaths I pray Alexander Dzadourian Z. C. Boyajian 43 O little breeze, how fresh and sweet Muggurdich Beshigtashlian Z. C. Boyajian 89 Once more God hither moves their course Saint Nerses Shnorhali Z. C. Boyajian 58 O Night, be long—long as an endless year Nahabed Kouchak Z. C. Boyajian 5 On the morning of thy birth Nahabed Kouchak Z. C. Boyajian 31 O swallow, gentle swallow C. A. Dodochian Alice Stone Blackwell 111 Slumbering darkly yesterday Bedros Tourian Z. C. Boyajian 84 Soft and low a voice breathed o’er me S. Shahaziz Z. C. Boyajian 46 Stork, I welcome thy return Folk Song Z. C. Boyajian 27 Sweet slumber now creeps o’er thee slow Raphael Patkanian Z. C. Boyajian 21 The clinging children at their mother’s knee William Watson xvi The Crane has lost his way across the heaven Hovhannes Toumanian Z. C. Boyajian 62 The door of Heaven open seemed Folk Song Z. C. Boyajian 3 The fox ran up into the mill Folk Song Z. C. Boyajian 90 The Hawk said to the Dove, “My dear” Folk Song Z. C. Boyajian 63 The incense at the altar slowly burns Zabelle Essayan Z. C. Boyajian 17 The lips of the Christ-child are like to twin leaves Saint Gregory of Narek Alice Stone Blackwell 113 The little fox, the wolf and bear made peace Folk Song Z. C. Boyajian 15 The Rose was gone. When to the empty tent Grigoris of Aghtamar Z. C. Boyajian 52 The Sky bent down his piercing gaze one day Hovhannes Toumanian Z. C. Boyajian 79 The sun has touched the mountain’s crest Folk Song Z. C. Boyajian 36 The sun went down behind the hill Avetis Isahakian Z. C. Boyajian 30 The wind is howling through the winter night Avetis Isahakian Z. C. Boyajian 42 Thou art so sweet thou wilt not pain Sayat Nova Z. C. Boyajian 110 Thy voice is soft, thy speech all sweetness flows Sayat Nova Z. C. Boyajian 74 Undying Love, Whose beams forever glow Bedros Tourian Z. C. Boyajian 121 Unutterable silence here is spread Raffi George M. Green 86 Weary of vainly seeking Happiness Arschag Tchobanian Z. C. Boyajian 118 Whence comest thou, my moon, gentle and still Leo Alishan Z. C. Boyajian 108 When Death’s pale angel comes to me Bedros Tourian Z. C. Boyajian 50 When the God of Liberty Mikael Nalbandian Z. C. Boyajian 12 Why dost thou lie in hushed surprise Bedros Tourian Alice Stone Blackwell 18 With nuts and sweets and dainty fare Raffi Z. C. Boyajian 78 Without thee what are song and dance to me? Sayat Nova Z. C. Boyajian 85 Ye mountain bluebells, weep with me Avetis Isahakian Z. C. Boyajian 29 Yesternight I walked abroad Author Unknown Z. C. Boyajian 7 Charm Verses Folk Songs Z. C. Boyajian 67
PROSE LEGENDS
Ara and Semiramis Moses of Khorene Z. C. Boyajian 23 Artashes and Satenik Moses of Khorene Z. C. Boyajian 48 Artavasd Moses of Khorene Z. C. Boyajian 65 Christ and Abgarus Moses of Khorene Z. C. Boyajian 75 The Castle of Anoush Raffi Z. C. Boyajian 114 The Founding of Van Moses of Khorene Z. C. Boyajian 33 Vahagn, King of Armenia Moses of Khorene Z. C. Boyajian 10
NOTES
[1] The “feast of Father Abraham” means plenty.
[2] An apple is the symbol of love.
[3] Armenian babies are tied tightly into their cradles when they are put to sleep.
[4] This and the other translations by Miss Alice Stone Blackwell are reprinted from Armenian Poems, by the translator’s kind permission.
[5] Oror—lullaby.
[6] Armenian babies have their eyes bandaged when they are put to sleep, and they are tied into their cradles.
[7] Santoukhd was martyred by the order of her father, King Sanadroug, for becoming a Christian.
[8] The late Hagop Bey Balian.
[9] A great number of these little poems exist. They are traditional, and are used for fortune-telling. On the Eve of Ascension Day all those who wish to have their fortunes told place some little trinket into a bowl containing seven different kinds of flowers and water from seven springs. The bowl is left open to the stars until dawn, when the party assemble and select a child who cannot tell where the sun rises to take the trinkets out as the verses are repeated. The owner of the token takes the verse preceding its being brought out as his or her fortune.
[10] The Eve of Ascension Day is the time when betrothals are arranged and destinies decided.
[11] The patron saint of lovers.
[12] The poem entitled “Complaints,” written a few days before his death.
[13] “Ner”—the Antichrist, concerning whom the Armenians have many traditions.
[14] Haberban.
[15] The Paradise of Mohammed, where the souls of the blest are waited upon by beautiful houris, and fed with delicious fruits.
[16] Above the summit of Aragatz, the mountain that faces Ararat on the far side of the plain, a weird light is sometimes visible, traditionally called the Lamp of Saint Gregory the Illuminator.
[17] Anoush - sweet.
[18] This and the following poem are reprinted from Nuove Liriche, by Vittoria Aganoor Pompilj, Roma. Nuova Antologia.
[19] Navasard fell, according to the later calendar of pagan Armenia, in August.
[20] See Agathangelos (fourth century A.D.).
[21] Annual bonfires are kindled by Armenians on the festival of Candlemas, or the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary (February 13/2).
[22] Agathangelos.
[23] Statues of massive gold were consecrated to her, one of which was captured by the soldiers of Antony (Pliny, H. N., xxx. 24).
[24] At each festival, the Armenians had to show what progress they had made during the past year, in art and in other occupations, and races and other competitions took place, the victors being crowned with wreaths of roses. When the doves were set flying the High Priest sprinkled the people with the waters of the Aradzani—a tributary of the Euphrates—and the people in their turn sprinkled each other. The customs dated back to traditions of the deluge—that universal baptism with which God cleansed all the sinful earth, and the same expression of love and forgiveness is manifested in the presence of the dove at the baptism of Jordan. See Raffi’s Samuel, chap. ix.
[25] Astghik means in Armenian “little star.”
[26] It is a curious coincidence that Venus, the Greek goddess of beauty, was also the wife of a fire-god, Vulcan.
[27] Some say that Ammanor was an ancient Armenian god and not foreign.
[28] Kadjk means in Armenian “brave ones.”
[29] Zarmaïr, another king of this dynasty, took part in the defence of Troy. The historian emphasises the fact that he was killed by Achilles himself.
[30] It is interesting to recall, in this connection, some passages of Strabo. Speaking of Armenia he says:—“It is said that people passing by the foot of the mountains are often buried in the snow which falls from the summits. In order to be prepared for such a mishap, travellers carry with them two long sticks for the purpose of making breathing places for themselves, should they be covered by the snow. The sticks, at the same time, serve as signals to any other travellers who may happen to be passing.”
[31] Cf. the original text of the Armenian poem which is as follows:—
Երգներ երգին և երգիր Erkner erkin ev erkir Երգներ և ծիրանի ծով Erkner ev dzirani dzov Երգն ի ծովուն ուներ Erkn i dzovun uner Զգարմրիգ եղեկնիգն. Zkarmrik eghegnikn. Ընգ եղեգան փող, ծուխ ելաներ Ŭnd eghegan pogh, dzukh elaner Ընգ եղեգան փող, քոց ելաներ Ŭnd eghegan pogh, botz elaner, Եվ ի քոցտին պատանեկիկ վազեր, Ev i botzuin patanekik vazer, Նա հուր հեր ուեր, Na hur her uner, Ապա թե բոց ուներ մօրուս Apa te botz uner morus Եվ աչկունքն եին արեգակունք. Ev achkunkn ein aregakunk.
[32] The following lines from a Chaldean description of Ut-napisti, the Chaldean Noah’s sacrifice after the Flood, furnish an example from Assyrian poetry:—
“The gods smelled a savour, The gods smelled a sweet savour, The gods gathered like flies over the sacrifice.”
[33] Dziran in Armenian means “apricot,” therefore dzirani = “of apricot colour.”
[34] Strabo says about Artaxata that it was built upon a design which Hannibal gave to King Artaxes (Artashes), who made it the capital of Armenia, and Tournefort, the famous French botanist, who travelled in Armenia in the seventeenth century, exclaims, in reference to this fact: “Who could have imagined that Hannibal would come from Africa to Armenia to be engineer to an Armenian king? But so it is.”
[35] April, when the New Year commenced.
[36] The son of Tigranes the Great.
[37] “Armenios, one of the Argonauts, who was believed to have been a native of Rhodes or of Armenion in Thessaly, and to have settled in the country which was called after him, Armenia” (Strabo, xi. 530, etc.; Justin, xlii. 2; Steph. Byz. S. V. Αρμενια).
[38] Translations of Moses of Khorene: Latin (with Armenian text), Whiston (G. & G.), London, 1736; Italian, Cappelletti (G.), Venice, 1841; Tommaseo (H.), Venice, 1849–50; German, Lauer (M.), Regensburg, 1869; French (with Armenian text), Le Vaillant de Florivel (P. E.), Paris, 1841 (2 vols.), and in Langlois’ Collection, vol. ii.; Russian, M. Emin, Moscow.
[39] See Travel and Politics in Armenia, by Noel Buxton, M.P., and Rev. Harold Buxton; with Introduction by Viscount Bryce and a Contribution on Armenian History and Culture by Aram Raffi. Smith, Elder & Co. 1914.
[40] The history of this war is recorded by Eghishé, a contemporary ecclesiastic, whose work is more widely read than any book except the Bible. He is a poet rather than an historian.
[41] All the metrical translations quoted are by Miss Z. C. Boyajian. Like her other translations in this volume they are almost literal renderings; and the original metre has been kept.
[42] These monarchs are mentioned because they were the first Christian sovereigns.
[43] In the Armenian Church there are two classes of clergy—the higher order to which bishops belong and who do not marry, and the lower order of parish priests who do marry.
[44] It is interesting to compare this with a Persian poem by Essedi of Tus called a dispute between Day and Night. In the former the Earth is victorious, in the latter the Day. The Persian is essentially Mohammedan in spirit and conventional, whereas the Armenian is almost modern.
Day. By day the pious fast and pray; And solemn feasts are held by day.
Night. Day can but paint the skies with blue, Night’s starry hosts amaze the view.
Day. ... I am a Moslem—white my vest, Thou a vile thief, in sable drest. Out, negro-face!—dar’st thou compare Thy cheeks with mine, so purely fair?
... The Sun is ruddy, strong, and hale: The moon is sickly, wan, and pale. Methinks ’twas ne’er in story told That silver had the worth of gold! The moon, a slave, is bowed and bent, She knows her light is only lent, She hurries on, the way to clear, Till the Great Shah himself appear.
From “The Rose Garden of Persia.”