Levon TER - PETROSIAN
PH. D.
1. PERIODIZATION OF ARMENIAN TRANSLATIONS
a. Classical Translations
b. Hellenophile School of Translations
c. Translations of the Cilician Period
d. Uniat Milieu Translations
e. Later Medieval Translations
2. TRANSLATORS
a. Translators of the 5th - 8th centuries.
b. Translators of the 12th -13th centuries.
c. Translators of the 17th - 18th centuries.
3. RESCUED WORKS
4. LITERARY TRANSLATIONS
1. PERIODIZATION OF ARMENIAN TRANSLATIONS
The history of translation into Armenian is an uninterrupted process, though some periods saw a rise or decline in activity, in accordance with the cultural climate of the time. The Armenian translation movement flourished during five principal periods; in each, different types of works were translated, different goals were pursued, and new methods of translation evolved. The classification given below is partly based on chronology, and partly on historical and cultural characteristics.a. Classical period of translations (throughout the 5th century).
b. Hellenophile School of translations (from the end of the 5th to the beginning of the 8th century).
c. Translations of the Cilician period (12th and 13th centuries).
d. Translations produced in the milieu of the Uniats (14th century).
e. Later medieval translations (17th and 18th centuries).
It is evident that this classification does not include the period from the beginning of the 8th century through the 9th, or that from the 15th century to the 16th. These were periods of decline in the activity of translation.
The translations of the Classical period were intended to meet the immediate needs of a budding Armenian literature, to reinforce the doctrinal and liturgical activities of the Church, and to provide texts for use in education. This is why the efforts of the first Armenian translators reveal a goal-oriented program of a kind that could truly be described, in the words of the German armenologist F. Finck, as “a conscious plan of cultural transmission.”
This plan called first of all for the translation of the Bible, and afterwards for liturgical books, patristic literature, commentaries and apologetics, Church histories and canons, lives of saints, that is, the entire corpus of Christian knowledge (The Bible, liturgy, patristic literature, hermeneutics, apologetics, history, canon, hagiography). These were essential for the immediate needs of the Armenian Church and for the development of a national literature.
a. Classical Translations
The vast corpus of the 5th century translations of different genres of literature that have survived indicates that the founders of Armenian literature fully achieved their aim, translating writings in all these areas from Byzantine and Syriac Christian sources. The most ancient work translated into Armenian, and the most important from the historical, cultural and scholarly viewpoints is the Bible. The Armenian Bible was put in its final form in the 430-ies. Touching every social sphere of Armenian life, the Armenian version of the Bible left a distinct mark on the whole of Armenian culture: literature, art, science, and even folklore. Medieval Armenian religious poetry, miniature painting, music, and architecture are deeply colored by its influence. In a certain sense, the development of the art of calligraphy was also linked to the Bible, as it was the most frequently copied book of the Middle Ages. The best scribes of professional scriptoria attached to the large monasteries copied biblical texts, usually written on the choicest vellum. Such circumstances could only have a positive effect on the calligraphers’ art development.
 |
|
Gospel of Yerznka, 1201
Ms. 10359, f. 9v,
|
The Armenian translations of the 5th century were all made from Greek and Syriac. Translations from the Syriac predate those from Greek, though in range and quantity they fall considerably short of those from Greek. The translations made from Syriac and Greek noticeably differ from each other in style, vocabulary and verbal thinking. On the basis of this difference, some scholars distinguish two schools in the 5th century: a Syriac school and a Hellenic one. Yet the evidence passed down by Armenian historians that the same authors, i.e. Sahak Parthev, Eznik Koghbatsi, Hovsep Paghnatsi, and others translated from both Greek and Syriac, refutes this theory. As for the noticeable stylistic differences between translations of Greek writings and those in Syriac, they need not indicate the existence of different schools, but are rather due to the characteristic features of the two languages.
During the 5th century, the major method employed in translation was to aim for a literal, but not
 |
| Eusebius of Caesarea Chronicle, 13thc., Ms. 1904, f. 61v |
Many scholars, misled by the accepted chronological limits of the so-called Golden Age of Armenian literature, usually date the classical period of Armenian translations within the years 405-460. However, translations in the classical style continued to appear not only until the later 5th century, but also, it appears, on through later times, contemporary with the translations of the Hellenophile School.
In the second period of the Armenian translations development, religious texts gave precedence to theoretical works, dogmatic and philosophical writings related to the needs of contemporary Armenian life and the desire to master the achievements of ancient philosophy and science. During this period the Art of Grammar of Dionysius Thrax, Aphthonius' Book of Useful Knowledge, Theon of Alexandria's On Rhetorical Exercises (Progymnasmata), Porphyrius’ Introduction to the Analysis of Aristotle's Categories, some writings of Plato and Aristotle, the philosophical commentaries of the Neo-Platonic philosophers, such as Jamblichus and David the Invincible, Gregory of Nyssa's and Nemesius of Emessa's writings on physiology, the dogmatic and theological writings of Philo of Alexandria, Irenaeus of Lyon, Timothy Aelurus, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite and other works were translated by representatives of the Hellenophile School. The translations listed above encompass all the areas of knowledge known to medieval man: grammar, rhetoric, philosophy, natural sciences, and theology. They attest to the consistent and purposeful activity of the Hellenophile School.
Specialists in Armenian studies have done a considerable amount of work on the classification and dating of Hellenophile School translations. The most recent classification, taking into account the basic conclusions of former scholars, is that put forth by academician S. Arevshatian, a scholar specializing in the history of philosophy. Arevshatian proposes the following chronological sequence for the translations of the Hellenophile School:
First period (from the 450-ies to the 480-ies)
Second period (from the480-ies to the 510-ies)
Third period (from the 510-ies to the 600-ies)
Fourth period (from the 610-ies to the 710-ies)
Dionysius Thrax's Art of Grammar is considered to be the earliest translation of the Hellenophile School. The latest are the theological-philosophical writings of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite.
As grammatical and philosophical works were translated, there emerged a need to forge corresponding Armenian terms for technical concepts. The translators of the Hellenophile School tackled this problem arbitrarily by means of calques and newly coined prefixes. In this way, beyond their contributions to the spread of classical learning in Armenia and to the development of medieval Armenian philosophy and science, the translators of the Hellenophile School are important for their creation of a scientific terminology for Armenian. Prefixes such as ap~, ar'-, ger-, ent'-, hak-, stor-, mak-, tar-, tram-, pokh-, ner- and others, which are very common in modern Armenian, and even today comprise the building blocks of scientific terminology, were at first employed by representatives of the Hellenophile School as calques on the Greek.
b. Hellenophile School of Translations
In contrast to the translators of the Classical period, those of the Hellenophile School were guided by the principle of literal rendition of texts. Because of this, the translations they produced display a convoluted style whose syntactical structure was aliening to Armenian. Nevertheless, in the course of time Armenian culture dismissed the excesses of the Hellenophile School, while accepting its achievements.
As noted earlier, the 8th and 9th centuries mark a period of decline in the production of Armenian translations This is evident not only in the relatively small number of translations that have survived from that period, but also from the absence of any uniformity of method and purpose
 |
| Euclid, Geometry, 14thc. Ms. 8132, f. 182v, |
c. Translations of the Cilician Period
It is difficult to single out any consistency of purpose in the translations of the Cilician period, unlike in those of the Classical period and the Hellenophile School. Certain characteristics, however, set them apart as representatives of a distinct stage in the development of Armenian literary translation. The most significant feature of this period translations is their interest in practical knowledge: jurisprudence, medicine and agriculture, which was a response to the immediate needs of the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia. In order to cope with these needs, Armenians translated from Syriac, Greek, Old French and Arabic works such as the Syrio-Roman Law Book, the corpus of Byzantine Law, the Assizes of Antioch, the medical and physiological works of Abu-Said and the priest Ishokh, which are based on Eastern sources, as well as the Geoponic, a kind of Encyclopedia of medieval agronomy, Faraj the Syrian's Treatise of Hippiatry (Care of Horses) and others. According to a valuable colophon, King Hetum I of Cilicia ordered translations of works on copper smelting, the care of horses, sword making and astrology.
The tradition of the Classical period was also partially maintained, as new lives of saints, martyrdoms, homilies, and commentaries were translated. Continuing the work of Grigor the Martyrophile, Nerses Lambronatsi edited the Patéricon (Lives of Holy Fathers) on the basis of several old and new translations, and translated from the Greek The Lives of Italian Fathers by Pope Gregory. Nerses Lambronatsi also translated a number of ecclesiastical canons, letters, commentaries, and liturgical books. In the 12th century Catholicos Grigor III Pahlavuni and his brother Nerses the Graceful also played an important role in the production of new translations.
The proximity of Syria and the presence of a Syrian population in Cilician Armenia encouraged the translation of numerous works from Syriac. Among these were Jacob of Sarug’s Homilies, Michael the Syrian's Chronicle, Daniel of Salah’s Commentary on the Psalms, as well as the Live of Ephrem the Syrian and the Lives of Barsouma the Hermit and Sarkis the Stratelate. During this period, a number of Syriac writings were also translated from the Greek, works such as the Testament of Ephrem the Syrian and some of his Homilies.
In Cilician Armenia a new method of translation was adopted. Its origins are connected with Grigor the Martyrophile. The translations were usually produced through a joint effort between foreign and Armenian scholars, that is the Greek or Syriac translator presented a literal rendition of the text, to which the Armenian editor applied the final stylistic polish. Consequently, these Armenian translations sometimes vary considerably from the original texts and can be considered as “free” translations.
There is still another noteworthy feature in the translations of the Cilician period. While the ecclesiastical literature, the lives of saints, martyrdoms, homilies and commentaries were translated into Classical Armenian, works intended for practical purposes: the Assizes of
Antioch, the Geoponica, Faraj the Syrian's Treatise of Hippiatry, medical books, and other works were done into Middle Armenian in order that they might be accessible to the populace.
The 13th thirteenth century also saw a rise in the production of translations in the northeastern provinces of Greater Armenia, which were under the influence of the Georgian Kingdom. From the Georgian Simon Pghndzahanetsi translated Proclus Diadochus' Elements of Theology, John of Damascus' Source of Knowledge, John of Sinai's Scales of Paradise, as well as the History of the Georgians and the Greek Breviary. However, this literary vintage of Armenians - Chalcedonians differed greatly, both in nature and purpose, from the Cilician translations. They were more closely related to the translations of the ensuing period, that of the Uniats.
d. Uniats Milieu Translations
Translations produced in the circle of the Uniats, unlike those of the preceding period, made in order to satisfy the spiritual needs of the Armenians, were commissioned by aliens for their own purposes. It cannot be denied that the origins of the Uniat movement in Armenia were connected with political incentives like the vain dream of liberating the Armenian people with the Papacy's aid. However, reality was that the Uniat movement not only failed to play any part in the realization of that dream, but also actually alienated a considerable portion of the Armenian people. Despite this negative role, the Uniat movement left a noticeable mark on Armenian culture, especially in the development of the natural sciences and philosophy.
The cultural centers of the Uniat movement in Armenia were the Armenian-Franciscan monastery in the village of Tzortzor (district of Artaz) and the Armenian-Dominican monastery in the village of Krna (district of Nakhijevan). At these sites, European missionaries such as the friars Pontius, Bartholomew of Bologna (or of Maragha), Peter of Aragon, and their Armenian companions, Hovhannes of Tzortzor, Hovhannes of Krna and Hakob of Krna, were actively involved in missionary and literary work. Through their efforts, in the short span of years between about 1320 and 1340, a large number of liturgical, propagandistic, theological, exegetical, philosophical, and scientific works were translated out of Latin. Among the most important translations produced in the Uniat milieu are: the Book of Six Principles falsely attributed to Gilbert de la Porret; Albert the Great's Compendium of Theological Truths; Thomas Aquinas' On Church Sacraments, Theological Sum and the Book of Virtues; Nicholas of Lyra's Commentary on the Gospel of John and Commentary on the Epistle of Paul to the Hebrews, Bartholomew of Maragha's Commentary On the Six Days of Creation, Dialectical Sum, and Book of Homilies; Peter of Aragon's Law Book compiled on the Basis of Roman Church Canons, Brief Analysis of Aristotle’s Categories, Analysis of the Book Called “On Explanation”, Brief Compilation of Porphyrius’ Introduction, and many others.
The Armenian Uniats also had their historian, Nerses Palianents, who during his stay in the 1340-ies in Avignon in France, the center of the Roman Catholic Church at that time, translated from Latin Martin of Oppavia's Chronicle of the Succession to the Papacy, adding the necessary supplement to bring it up to date.
These translations, however, were not restricted to the narrow limits of the Uniat milieu. They were soon put into circulation, penetrating the Armenian centers of education, contributing to the development of philosophy and the natural sciences and to the transmission of ancient culture through the channels of European scholasticism. Their beneficent influence upon the Armenian Gladzor-Tathev Schools of philosophy is undeniable. The spiritual leaders of those schools, Esayi Nchetsi, Hovhan Vorotnetsi and Grigor Tathevatsi, while leading a determined and unyielding struggle against the negative aspects of Catholicism, were still able to appreciate and utilize the positive scientific and cultural contributions of the Uniat milieu.
e. Later Medieval Translations
After its decline during the 15th and 16th centuries, literature in translation reached its final stage of development in the late Middle Ages. The noticeable revival of activity in translation during the 17th and 18th centuries was due to the growing vitality of the Armenian colonies, the important role played by Armenian merchants in international commerce, and the general progress of Armenian cultural life. The Armenians were, perhaps, the first people of the Orient to become aware of European culture, learning the most recent achievements in geography, mathematics, grammar, and natural sciences all through translations. The introduction of printing provided a vital opportunity for the dissemination of knowledge among the reading public. This had an obvious impact on the development of Armenian culture and brought to a rise in the standards of education among the Armenians. During the 17th century, Hovhannes of Ancyra, Stepanos of Poland, Voskan of Yerevan and Hovhannes Holov accomplished important work in the field of translation. The first translated the Latin Geography, Peter Appianus’ Cosmography, Ptolemy's Geography; the History of Countries; the Physiology and About Stones, and other works. Among the valuable translations of Stepanos of Poland are: Flavius Josephus' History of the Jewish Wars, Aristotle's Metaphysics; Proclus Diadochus' Book of Causes; Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite's four works, which had formerly been translated from Greek by Stepanos Siunetsi at the beginning of the 8th century; and also the miscellany Great Mirror. It is important to note that, unlike Stepanos of Poland's other translations, which were made from Latin, the miscellany Great Mirror was translated from Polish. Voskan of Yerevan translated out of Latin the Art of Grammar, the Elements of Logic, a Dictionary of Philosophy and a number of Biblical Books, in order to supplement his 1666 edition of the Armenian version of the Bible. Hovhannes Holov's important translations include a Commentary on the Psalms of David, Spiritual Garden, Flower of Virtues, Thomas Kempis' Imitation of Christ, John-Baptist Borta's Physiognomica. The translation of the Art of Counting, published in 1675 at the printing press of Voskan in Marseille, is also attributed to him. In a certain sense many books published at the printing press of Vanandetsi, who worked in Amsterdam at the end of the 17th century, must be considered translations, or, more precisely, adaptations.
In the 18th century Armenian translations were for the most part produced in two cities: Venice, where the Mekhitarist Fathers worked assiduously on scientific and literary works, and Constantinople, where widespread educational and cultural plans were implemented both among Catholic Armenian and under the aegis of the Armenian Patriarchate. At the end of the same century, numerous translations were also published in other centers of Armenian printing: in Trieste, Madras, St. Petersburg and Nor-Nakhichevan. Noteworthy among the 18th-century translators are Mekhitar of Sebastia, Petros of Tiflis, Hovhan Tokhatetsi, Petros Muhupian, Athanase Merasian, Ghukas Kharberdtsi, Vrtanes Askerian, Margar Shahrimanian and others. Any bibliography of old Armenian printed books would contain a full listing of the literary output of these and other translators, so it would be redundant to present their numerous published translations here. It should be noted that among Armenian publications of the 17th and 18th centuries, translations of religious and dogmatic works make up a large proportion, together with scientific literature and works of practical application. European preachers or Armenians who had embraced Catholicism translated religious texts with the intention of spreading Roman Catholic faith among the Armenians.
As we have seen, each of the five periods of Armenian translations left a significant mark on the history of Armenian literature, influencing its course of development and enriching the Armenian reader's store of information in many different ways.
2. THE TRANSLATORS
a. Translators of the 5th – 8th centuriesIt is well known that the Armenian Church sanctified the Translators, commemorating them annually during the month of October. That day of commemoration has, since ancient times, been made a national feast. From the previous chapter it is not difficult to see why, because of their enormous endeavors, the translators were deemed worthy of such an honor. It seems that in the Middle Ages it was an altogether well-known fact that, apart from their cultural service, the 5th-century translators played a decisive role in forging of the Armenian Church identity, and in the perpetuation of the national character of the Armenian people. Had the spiritual leaders of the Armenian people not created the Armenian script, and had they not translated the Bible as well as the requisite liturgical literature, the Church would have been forced to continue conducting the liturgy in foreign languages, either Greek or Syriac, as it had done in the 4th century. This could have been fatal to the effort to preserve the national identity under adverse circumstances, when the Armenian people had lost their sovereignty. With the invention of an alphabet, the translation of the Bible, and a liturgy in the Armenian language, a solid foundation was laid for the creation of a national culture that would ensure that the fateful storms of ensuing centuries could be confronted.
Even before the invention of the Armenian alphabet, there were translators in the Armenian churches immediately after the conversion to Christianity, probably as early as the beginning of the 4th century. Their function was to translate orally the church services, which were conducted in either Greek or Syriac, so that the people could understand the liturgy. Such translations were obviously not literal renditions, but rather comments or explanations of the texts. Consequently, it is not surprising to find that the words targmanich (translator) and targmanel (to translate) were sometimes used in Armenian literature to mean “commentator” and “to provide commentary.”
After the invention of the Armenian script, the function of ecclesiastical translators lost its former significance as the office was restructured. The translators easily changed their medium from the spoken to the written word. The availability of translators immediately after the invention of the alphabet provided the opportunity for the implementation of wide-ranging plans. To that end, Mashtots and Sahak sent pupils to the renowned centers of Greek and Syriac culture: Edessa, Constantinople, and Alexandria. The mission of two praiseworthy translators at Edessa and Byzantium was described by Koriun as follows: “Again it so happened that they (Mashtots and Sahak) sent from among their pupils two brothers, [the first called] Hovsep, whom we mentioned above, and the other called Eznik, who was from the village of Kolb in the district of Ayrarat, to Syria, to the city of Edessa, so that they translate and put in writing the traditions of the holy fathers from Syriac to Armenian. When the translators reached their destination, they carried out their orders and sent the translations to the venerable fathers. Then they went to the country of the Greeks where they studied, and becoming proficient they were appointed translators from the Greek”.
In Byzantium, two other translators, Koriun and Ghevond joined them. After accomplishing the task entrusted to them, these four translators returned, with their translations and a number of Greek texts, to continue their work in Armenia. These trips, undertaken for the production of translations, were motivated by a number of important circumstances. The rich libraries of the Greek and Syriac spiritual centers provided the opportunity to translate quite a considerable number of works. That was a much more efficient method in terms of expense and time than ordering or copying on valuable parchment codices of foreign texts, and sending them to Armenia to be translated. Such a method would also have deprived the translators of another basic element, which, it seems, must have played a very important role in ensuring the high quality of the Armenian translations. It is well known that in the Middle Ages there were no bilingual dictionaries, without which our cross-cultural exchanges of today would be difficult to imagine. Despite their knowledge of Greek or Syriac, when the translators ran into serious difficulties, such as complicated expressions in the foreign texts, or words too ambiguous or vague to be translated, their only means of overcoming the difficulty was to refer to living dictionaries, i.e. the Greek and Syriac archimandrites, whose consultation was only available on site. Therefore, it is not surprising that after Eznik's, Hovsep's, Koriun's and Ghevond's journey, a second group of translators was dispatched in the 5th century, but this time to Alexandria. Among the members of this group was Movses Khorenatsi, the Father of Armenian historiography. The representatives of the Hellenophile School had probably used the same method of approach in their work. We know that they were educated in Constantinople, Athens, Antioch and Alexandria, and so they presumably completed their translations in these cities.
b. Translators of the 12th – 13th centuries
During the Cilician and Uniat periods, the activities of the Armenian translators underwent a fundamental change. It is well known that many Greeks and Syrians living side by side with the Armenians in Cilicia had in the course of time learned Armenian, becoming attracted to the cultural life of the Armenian people. This made it possible for Greeks and Syrians to assume some of the burden of the task of producing translations. They usually produced literal translations of Greek and Syriac texts, which were later corrected and polished by Armenian editors. Some of the greatest figures of Armenian religious history, Grigor the Martyrophile, Nerses Shnorhali, Nerses Lambronatsi, Vardan Areveltsi, and others emerged as editors. The cooperation between Armenian and foreign translators is attested by many colophons extant in manuscripts. For example, in the colophon of the Life of St. Sarkis the Stratelate it is written: “This treatise was translated from Syriac into Armenian by the Syriac cleric Michael the Priest and was, as much as possible, adapted to our tongue through editing by Bishop Nerses, brother of Catholicos Grigoris, in the 607 of the Armenian era” (1158). The 13th century Armenian historian Vardan Areveltsi states in the colophon of Michael the Syrian's Chronology that “In 1248 of the coming of the eternal Son of God and in 697 of the Armenian era, this book was translated from Syriac into Armenian … by the priest Ishogh nourished by piety, who was well versed in the art of medicine and whom Jesus will repay for his work. I too, the tormented archimandrite Vardan, who toiled on this work to the best of my ability, have the right to believe and hope in God's mercy.”
c. Translators of the 17th – 18th centuries
The translations of the Uniat circle were also carried out following the same method. The European missionaries working in Armenia obviously lacked the mastery of Armenian necessary to produce adequate translations from Latin, so the Armenian Uniats greatly assisted them. In the Armenian-Franciscan congregation of Tzortzor, the friar Pontius and the Armenian archimandrite Israel collaborated on a number of translations. At Krna, a center of activity for the Uniats, the Dominican monks Bartholomew of Maragha and Peter of Aragon, and the Armenian archimandrites Hovhannes of Krna and Hacob of Krna produced significant works together. At the beginning of the collaboration between Hacob of Krna and Bartholomew, when the latter was in Maragha and had still not mastered Armenian, it had been necessary to seek the assistance of a Persian interpreter. That was how Thomas Aquinas' On Church Sacraments and a number of other texts came to be translated. Like their Cilician counterparts, the Uniat translators have also left records of their collaborative work attached to their translations. For example, the following information is appended to the work Against the Heretics, translated by Peter of Aragon and Hacob of Krna: “This was translated by Friar Peter and Friar Hacobos in the Monastery of Krna.” This cooperative effort of translators of different nationalities must, however, not be viewed as a particularly Armenian phenomenon, since it also occurred in the cultural life of other peoples. For example, in the 12th century Spain, the extensive translation of philosophical and scientific texts from Arabic was made possible by local scholars (mostly Jews) who spoke Arabic, and European doctors with a mastery of Latin. The efforts of these men prepared a strong foundation for the subsequent progress of philosophy and science in Europe.
Brief and lengthy colophons attached to texts provide a considerable amount of information about the 11th through the 16th centuries. Unfortunately translations from earlier periods lacked colophons. The colophons not only provide important information about the original texts, their dating, and the personality and nationality of their translators. They also inform us on occasion the difficulties encountered during the process of translation and the efforts exerted to solve them. Colophons of the 11th and 12th centuries, together with the testimony of contemporaries convey a particularly vivid image of the indefatigable translator Grigor the Martyrophile, whose activity is explained as follows by a 13th century source: “He once again enlightened the Armenian Church, like [St. Gregory] the Illuminator and the Holy Translators Sahak and Mesrop. Since he was a talented translator, he examined the books of all nations and those of value that did not exist in our tongue he either translated himself or with the help of other learned men.”
In another 13th century source, the History of Kirakos Gandzaketsi, Grigor the Martyrophile is described as “a wise and virtuous man”. The author of the colophon goes on to say: “This wonderful patriarch translated from Greek and Syriac numerous hagiographical works.” There are also echoes of his activities in medieval Armenian poetry. In Nerses Shnorhali Epic Poem, we read that:
“He appeared to us as a second Mesrop,
Translated numerous books,
Works on the lives of saints,
From Greek and Syriac.”
Translated numerous books,
Works on the lives of saints,
From Greek and Syriac.”
The following episode from the life of Grigor Martyrophile, recorded in the Life of Nerses Shnorhali, is an eloquent testimonial of his zealous activity. Arriving to Constantinople on an official visit, Grigor took advantage of the opportunity, asking the Byzantine emperor and the patriarch to allow him to remain in the capital in order to examine the codices there. The emperor and the patriarch not only granted him permission to consult the manuscripts, but also accommodated him and his companions as guests of the royal court. Grigor immediately went to work, and in a short time, he had translated from Greek into Armenian numerous lives of saints, martyrdoms, homilies dedicated to religious feasts, a number of works written by the Church Fathers, and so on. He passed these translations on to skilful and erudite scribes and editors in his company, who immediately edited them according to the rules of Armenian usage and the requirements of the art of rhetoric. After he had completed his plan, Grigor, suspecting that the Greeks might not allow the translated books to be taken out of the capital, had his associates embark by boat for Palestine with the translations. A few days later, he calmly bade the emperor farewell and followed them. In order to save the translated books, Grigor the Martyrophile, who must have had good cause for his suspicion, was even forced to resort to guile.
Other Armenian translators encountered various difficulties, which they overcame with great effort. In the colophon of the Armenian translation of Arethas of Caesarea's Commentary on the Revelation of John, Nerses Lambronatsi describes his tremendous efforts and tireless research. “After reading the Revelation of John, I was troubled in my soul, since I did not comprehend the meaning of the wonderful words. Having searched here and there for a commentary on it in our tongue, I could find nothing. Thereafter I happened to go to the great city of Antioch and with the desire set ablaze in my mind, I toured the Greek and Frankish (Latin) monasteries there. While looking around, I found among the books in the renowned St. Paul Monastery of that town a commentary on the Revelation, which two exegetes had composed in Lombardic dialect and in characters employed by the Franks. Wishing to acquire a translation, I found no one who could translate it from that tongue into Armenian. Leaving the city and going to one of the Greek monasteries in the mountains to the north, which was called Betias, I found what I sought under seal with a lonely hermit called Basil. It was written in Greek characters, correctly and handsomely. The book had belonged to the Patriarch Athanasius of that city. Seeking it through the mediation of well-meaning people, I acquired the book and made haste to go to the residence of the patriarch, my lord the saintly Catholicos Grigorios. When the latter was informed of this, he was overjoyed and ordered to translate it with the assistance of Constantine, Metropolitan of Hieropolis, who lived there under the protection of the saintly patriarch. With the help of God and the Holy Lord, he began to translate and I put it to writing. In this way we made this Commentary on the Divine Revelation available to the children of the Armenian Church who love learning.”
During the ensuing centuries, the function of the professional translator in Armenia again underwent a change as the demand for translations became greater in the Armenian Diaspora, particularly in centers where there were Armenian presses. The renowned printers of the time usually took upon themselves the role of translator. Living in a foreign land, the printers generally possessed a good command of the local languages and carried out their work for the most part without the assistance of foreign translators. Moreover, these medieval printers translated works not only from foreign languages into Armenian, but also from Armenian into other languages, a task necessitated by the new conditions under which the Armenian people were living.
In the Armenian communities of the 17th and the 18th centuries, especially in the cities of Anatolia, Poland and the Crimea, most Armenians had lost their native tongue and communicated in Turkish or Kipchak. In order to prevent those Armenians from assimilation, their spiritual leaders were forced to translate into Turkish or Kipchak the religious and secular literature, without which the national and spiritual life in the Armenian communities would not have survived. Gradually, a very large corpus of translations into Turkish and Kipchak, but written in Armenian letters, came into existence, becoming an integral part of Armenian literature. These included not only works originally written in Armenian, but also writings translated from other languages over the centuries that had become part and parcel of Armenian literature. Besides Turkish and Kipchak translations in Armenian characters, we also find in Armenian manuscripts a small number of texts in Latin, Persian, Arabic, Greek, Syriac, Russian, Polish, and Hungarian. There are also occasional Armenian texts written in Arabic, Greek and Syriac characters.
The 18th and the 19th centuries in Europe saw the emergence of a great interest in the cultures of the East, including that of the Armenian people. Through the efforts of Armenian and foreign armenologists, the most important works of Classical Armenian literature: historical works of Movses Khorenatsi, Agathangelos, Faust of Byzantium, Eghishe, Sebeos, Hovhan Mamikonian, Hovhannes Draskhanakertsi, Artistakes Lastivertsi, Matthew of Edessa, the homilies and theological treatises of Hovhan Mandakuni and Hovhannes Odznetsi, the letters and poetry of Nerses Shnorhali, and other works were translated into Latin, French, Italian, English, Russian and German. These translations, however, differed radically from the medieval ones, since they were made to convey very specific kinds of information and were intended for purposes of scholarship.
3. RESCUED WORKS
The ancient and medieval Armenian translations have considerable value for fields other than Armenian studies. These works are of great importance for the study of world civilization, since many Greek and Syriac works, whose originals are lost, have been preserved in Armenian and have become a part of the legacy of contemporary civilization. Among these works one must first mention the Chronicle in two parts, by Eusebius of Caesarea (†339), which has come down to us through a 5th century Armenian translation. This work deals with an enormous period of history, from prehistoric times until the beginning of the 4th century A.D. It presents in sequence the chronologies of the Assyrian, Babylonian, Egyptian, Hebrew, Median, and Persian kingdoms, the Macedonian, Seleucid, and Ptolemaic dynasties, the Roman Empire and a number of other states and principalities. The first part of the work (Historical Chronology) consists of historical essays, while the second part (Chronological Canon), which also exists in a Latin translation made by St. Jerome, comprises a synchronic chart of the events described in the first part. Eusebius' Chronicle is of great value for modern scholarship not only as a source of knowledge about the 4th century, but also because it preserves excerpts from the works of a number of renowned ancient writers, such as Berosus, Alexander Polyhistor, and others. The Armenian critical edition of the Chronicle also includes a Latin translation and excerpts preserved in later Greek sources which are arranged in parallel columns beside the Armenian text. The Mekhitarist Fr. Mekertich Avgerian published the work in 1818. It is interesting to note that the Armenian translation of Eusebius' Chronicle has by a fortunate chance reached us through a single codex, now preserved in the Mashtots Institute of Ancient Manuscripts Matenadaran in Yerevan. Had that codex been lost, this valuable historical work would have been unknown to us.In the 420-ies, another work of Eusebius of Caesarea, his Ecclesiastical History, was translated into Armenian at the request of Mashtots. This is also of great scholarly value, since large sections are now missing from the Syriac version, from which it was translated. These lacunae have been filled with the aid of the Armenian translation.
Another important work among the early Armenian translations is The Demonstration (or Commentary) of the Apostolic Teaching by Irenaeus of Lyons (†203), discovered in the early 20th century. When it was published in 1907, it was recognized as the most important discovery of that year in patristic literature. This was due to the fact that the original Greek texts of this work and Irenaeus' other important treatise, Against the Heresies, are now lost. The latter, which consists of five books, is preserved in an old Latin translation. The fourth and fifth books of Against the Heresies survive in Armenian, and these are significant for the study of Irenaeus' literary legacy. Recently the French specialist in Armenian studies Reverend Father Charles Renoux published a lengthy Compilation of Irenaeus Works, which he had discovered in an Armenian manuscript. It contains many excerpts from the first three books of the Against the Heresies. This indicates that in the past a complete translation of the entire work was available in Armenian. Because of their value for scholars, the Armenian versions of Irenaeus' works were translated and published in a number of European languages: German, French, Russian, English, and others.
A considerable part of the literary legacy of the renowned 1st century Jewish philosopher and theologian Philo of Alexandria has been preserved thanks to Armenian translations. It is sufficient to note that the Greek originals of eight of the fifteen treatises of Philo that survive in Armenian are lost. These include: the Commentaries on the Books of Genesis and Exodus, Two Speeches on Providence, as well as the following homilies: On Animals, On Samson, On Jonas, and On God. Even though doubts have been raised about the authenticity of the last three homilies, scholars value these works for their significance as the literary products of a Greco-Jewish milieu. The Commentaries on the Books of Genesis and Exodus is among the more important Armenian translations and has been translated into Latin, English and French.
In Armenian literature the legacy of St. John Chrysostom (†407), one of the most famous representatives of Greek patristic literature, is second only to the Bible in volume and in the number of manuscripts copied in middle Ages. Much of it is known only from Armenian translations. In one of the most recent catalogues of patristic literature forty-three works either belonging to John Chrysostom or attributed to him are listed. Most of these works are still unpublished; to date only thirteen have appeared in print. Among Chrysostom's Armenian translations, the Commentary on Isaiah, of which only the first and eighth chapters are extant in the Greek original, the remaining fifty-six existing only in Armenian, has attracted particular scholarly attention. The Armenian version was put into scholarly circulation through a Latin translation published at the end of the 19th century.
The Commentary on Job by Hesychius of Jerusalem (†after 450) is another important Byzantine exegetical work preserved thanks to an Armenian translation. According to extant information, Hesychius wrote commentaries on all the books of the Holy Scriptures, but only a few survived. The publication of the Armenian version of the Commentary on Job was based on a defective manuscript. Complete copies of Hesychius' work, however, survive in manuscripts preserved at the Matenadaran. Based on a collation of these manuscripts, a new critical edition is now in the process of preparation. Recently, the Armenian version of Hesychius of Jerusalem's homily On Saint John was discovered. The Greek original of this work is also lost.
To this day the Greek text of the Refutation of the Decisions of the Council of Chalcedon by Timothy Aelurus (†477) has not been discovered. This important document of 5th century dogmatic controversy has reached us through Armenian and Syriac versions. The Belgian scholar J. Lebon, who has compared the Armenian text with the Syriac, has reached the conclusion that the latter represents an edited and condensed version of Timothy's work, while the Armenian has preserved the complete text in its original state. Timothy Aelurus' Refutation had a major impact on Armenian dogma. At the beginning of the 7th seventh century Catholicos Komitas composed an analogous collection of works, the Seal of Faith, and in the 13th century Vardan Aigektsi compiled another one called the Root of Faith. These anti-Chalcedonian works played an important role in the struggle for the independence of the Armenian Church and in the forging of the national identity of the Armenian people.
Armenian translations have helped to preserve the literary legacy of other renowned patristic writers, such as Athanasius of Alexandria (295-373), Severian of Gabala († after 408), Eusebius of Emessa (†359) and others. It is sufficient to note that only due to Armenian translations have Athanasius of Alexandria's eleven, Severian of Gabala's ten, and Eusebius of Emessa's nine homilies been recovered. The recently published Armenian version of Eusebius of Emessa's Commentary on the Eight Books of the Bible is of particular importance, since it survives in full, while only excerpts from the Greek original are preserved in medieval codices. One could also mention the Armenian translations of important texts by Aristides of Athens, Basil of Caesarea, Evagrius of Pontus, Deacon Euthalius, Cyril of Alexandria, Hippolytus of Bostra, Anthipatrus of Bostra and other ecclesiastical writers; the Greek originals of all of these works are now lost.
The greatest contributions to the patristic literature, however, are the ancient Armenian translations of the works of Ephrem the Syrian (†373). The Syriac originals of many of them these have not reached us. They include: a Collection of 51 Hymns; the Sixteen Elegies on Nicomedia, the Commentary on the Epistles of Paul; a considerable part of the Commentary on Tatian's Diatessaron; short commentaries on Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Judges, Joshua, Kings and Chronicles; excerpts from the Commentaries on Job and Acts, and a number of homilies, prayers, and admonitions. Since 1836, when the four-volume edition of Ephrem's works in Armenian was published, the above-mentioned titles have attracted the attention of European scholarship. During the 19th century a great deal of research was done in this field. New critical editions of some of these works were published with translations in Latin or in modern Western languages. For example, the Commentary on Tatian's Diatessaron saw two editions (1836 and 1953), and was translated twice into Latin (1876 and 1954) and once into French (1966). Based on the 1836 edition, a Latin translation of the Commentary on the Epistles of Paul appeared in 1893. Latin and English translations were made of the Commentary on the Acts (1926). The Hymns have been published three times (1934, 1957, 1966), most recently with a Latin translation facing the Armenian. The Elegies on Nichomedia had two editions (1930, 1975), the second of which was accompanied by a French translation.
There are two important reasons for the great interest in the Armenian versions of Ephrem's works. First, Ephrem is the greatest authority in Oriental patristic literature, and his teachings present the ideology of an Aramaic speaking Christendom, untouched by Greek influence. Second, his works bear upon the study of biblical texts, particularly upon the New Testament, since they were written before the earliest versions of the Greek and Syriac Bible had appeared. Besides Ephrem's works, a number of other Syriac writings have reached us through Armenian translations, such as Aithalaha of Edessa's Pastoral Epistle, Zenobius of Amida's Homilies, most of the Introduction to the Lives of the Eastern Martyrs, The Life of Maruta of Maypherqat, the Martyrdom of Yazdandukht and Bardisho, the Introduction to Michael the Syrian's Chronicle and Deacon Nana's Commentary on John, which was probably translated into Armenian from an Arabic version.
The significance of Armenian translations is not limited to ecclesiastical literature. Among the Armenian translations of philosophical and juridical texts are some that have not reached us in the original languages. The newly discovered Armenian translation of the philosopher Zeno's On Nature was published in 1949. The question of the authorship of this work has not been resolved. If the thesis of scholars that this is indeed from the pen of Zeno of Citium (336-264 B.C.), the founder of the Stoic school of philosophy is shown to be correct, the Armenian version could take on a major significance, enlightening us on the views and teachings of the Stoic school. Modern scholarship knows Zeno's writings only through excerpts preserved in the works of later Greek writers.
In 1956 the Armenian version of a work attributed to Hermes Trismegistus, Definitions of Hermes Trismegistus to Asclepius, was published. The Greek original of this is also thought to be lost. This religious-philosophical work, a remnant of Hermetic literature said to have been circulating Egypt in the 3rd century, adds considerably to scholars' understanding of that type of literature, and thus has attracted the attention of western European researchers. The Definitions of Hermes Trismegistus to Asclepius has been published in scholarly translations from Armenian into French and Russian.
The Armenian version of the Assizes of Antioch, translated into Armenian in mid-thirteenth century by the Constable Smbat, is also significant for modern scholarship. Until its discovery only the Assizes of Jerusalem were known to exist, although it was assumed that the other Crusader states in the Middle East also had their law books. The Armenian edition of the Assizes of Antioch, which appeared in 1876 with a French translation facing the Armenian, verified this thesis and provided valuable information for the study of the social order in the Crusader states. The Assizes of Antioch also sheds a light on various questions about the history of the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia. According to the testimony of the Constable Smbat, the law book was implemented within the borders of that kingdom.
The possibility remains that other works still unknown to scholarship and extant in not-catalogued Armenian manuscripts scattered all over the world may still be discovered. For example, two versions of works whose originals are no longer extant were very recently discovered and published: a theological treatise attributed to Patriarch Eutyches of Constantinople (+582) and Faradj the Syrian's Treatise of Hippiatry, a veterinary work.
It is important to add that not only Armenian translations with lost originals, but also those whose originals and other versions survive are of great value for scholarly research. In such cases, the Armenian versions are useful for correcting textual errors. For example, at the beginning of the 19th century, J.-M. Saint-Martin compared the Armenian version of Aristotle's and Plato's works with the Greek original, and reached the conclusion that the Armenian, since it was translated with great accuracy, “could be useful in the task of correcting the meaning of numerous sections in the texts of these philosophers.” Subsequently, the English armenologist Frederick Conybeare demonstrated the veracity of that thesis, based on his analysis of Aristotle's and Porphyrius' texts. He took into account three qualities characteristic of Armenian translations: ancientness, accuracy and irreproachableness of the texts that have reached us. One could also add that not only the works mentioned above, but also a large proportion of the other Armenian translations, fully possess these three features. Consequently they could be of great use in emending errors in the Greek and Syriac originals.
4. LlTERARY TRANSLATIONS
The previous chapters could create a false impression about medieval Armenian translations, suggesting that they were only produced to fulfill the Armenian reader's religious, scientific, and educational needs. Even after Christianity became the predominant religion in Armenia, the interest in works of a purely literary nature did not cease to exist. At the dawn of Armenian literature, translations were made not only of many works belonging to the genre of Christian literature (hagiography, spiritual poetry, etc.), but also of entirely secular writings. The number of these began to grow rapidly after the 10th through 13th centuries, as a general trend towards secularization became increasingly predominant in Armenian culture.The translations of literary works differ totally from those of a religious and scientific nature in their contents, textual history, and manuscript tradition. While the latter, as a rule, have reached us in a limited number of copies, many works of belles-lettres are preserved in scores and even hundreds of manuscripts. This is an eloquent testimony to their popularity and wide circulation. In the Middle Ages, religious and scientific texts were considered to be "canonical," and for that reason they were usually copied without any changes and with great accuracy. The works of belles-lettres, however, were subjected to many changes and rearrangements. As a result, the same work may exist in a number of variants and reductions expressing a different local and national character. The foremost work among the Armenian translations of belles-lettres, a text renowned for its ancientness, historical and cultural significance, is the History or Romance of
Alexander of Macedonia attributed to Pseudo-Callisthenes of Olynthus. According to scholars,
the translation was made in the second half of the 5th century by Movses Khorenatsi, the foremost Armenian historian. The Romance is a literary account of Alexander of Macedonia's mythical life, his long wars against the Persians, his foundations and cultural undertakings. It purports to create an ideal image of an all powerful and righteous hero. The Romance echoed the basic needs of the 5th century Armenian life: the restoration of the Armenian state and the demand for heroic examples from the past to inspire contemporaries. Therefore, the Armenian translation of the Alexander Romance made a significant impact on contemporary Armenian historiography, as well as that of the ensuing periods. Until the 13th century, its influence was exclusive on belles-lettres.
The Alexander Romance was revived in the 13th and 14th centuries, and after undergoing fundamental changes, was introduced to a wider circle of people, becoming one of the most widely read and listened to works of the time. The person who undertook and accomplished this task was the Armenian poet Khachatur Kecharetsi, whose plan had been to modernize the old romance, moderating its pantheist mood and reconciling its ideas with Christian morality. For that purpose he added many interpolations to the text, and, in order to make the Romance available to wider audience, added more than one hundred kafas or lyrical sections in rhymes, composed in the hayren meter, a very popular Armenian poetic form. In the 16th century Grigor Aghtamartsi and Zakaria Gnunetsi continued the work of Khachatur Kecharetsi. It was mainly through the efforts of these three authors that the independent Armenian version of the Alexander Romance came into being. The definite local features and national characteristics of this version are remarkable. The fact that over seventy manuscripts of the Armenian Alexander Romance survive is an indication of the work's popularity. Some of these manuscripts contain colorful miniatures depicting battle scenes that are classified among the best examples of Armenian secular illumination.
 |
| History of Alexander, 16th c. Ms. 5472, f. 49r, |
Works of an admonitory, moral, and educational nature are considerably well represented in the corpus of Armenian translations. Among the best examples of translated prose and belles-lettres of the Old World is the Story of Ahikar, which was created in the middle of the first millennium BC by Aramaic narrators. Its influence is noticeable even on the fables of Aesop and those books of the Bible that have a moral and admonitory content. Ahikar's story was translated into Armenian from Syriac in the 5th century. It became one of the most popular and widely read books among the Armenians. In the Armenian milieu the story went through a noticeable change as a series of variant editions emerged, scattered in hundreds of manuscripts. The work popularity was no doubt due to its fascinating plot. Ahikar, the advisor to Assyrian King Sennacherib, had no heirs, so he adopts his sister's son Nathan and, after giving him a basic education, places him in his own position. The latter, however, forgetting his uncle's favor, brings serious charges against him before the king. Ahikar is condemned to death, but with the help of a faithful servant he escapes and hides. After some time, the Pharaoh of Egypt poses a number of difficult riddles to Nathan, with the stipulation that if he cannot solve them, Assyria will become a vassal of Egypt. When Nathan is unable to solve the riddles, Sennacherib remembers with regret his wise advisor Ahikar and laments his loss. At that point the servant discloses Ahikar's secret. The king welcomes his advisor with joy and sends him to Egypt, where he cunningly solves all the riddles posed by the Pharaoh. Returning victoriously he is restored and given all of his former honors and possessions. Nathan, now at Ahikar's mercy, is severely rebuked by his uncle.
The story is interrupted by two extensive series of admonitions. The first deals with the period of Nathan's upbringing and education. Here Ahikar bequeaths to his nephew the wisdom of life, advising him to keep away from all kinds of scandals and wicked deeds, e.g. “Son, it is better to carry stones with a wise man than to drink wine in company with a slanderer or a senseless person”; or “Son, do not say much about anyone, so that others may say good things about you.” The second series of admonitions follows the account of Nathan's punishment and consists of condemnations of his ungratefulness, e.g. “Son, you treated me like the dog that entered the furnace-room of the potter and after warming up began to bark at him”; or "Son, I exalted you before God and men, but you repaid your benefactor with wickedness.”
The series of admonitions attributed to King Chosroes Anosharvan of Persia, which was translated into Armenian in the 13th century, also belongs to this genre of literature. From the viewpoint of literary relations Nushirvan 's Admonitions have undergone an interesting history, both prior to the work's translation into Armenian and afterwards. This work, originally written in Middle Persian, was composed in the 6th century; it was translated into Arabic in the 9th century; in the 10th century it was retranslated from Arabic into New Persian, from which it was done into Armenian in the 13th century. Subsequently, in the 18th century, it was translated into Turkish written in Armenian characters. Like Ahikar's Story, Nushirvan's Admonitions was a work very widely read in medieval Armenia, and various versions and reductions of it were copied in manuscripts. One can see in it a characteristic expression of the social relations, and behavioral patterns, moral standards, and customs of a feudal society that were altogether comprehensible and acceptable to the Armenian reader. The echoes of the Admonitions in medieval admonitory poetry such as the elegies of Khachatur Kecharetsi, Hovhannes Erzynkatsi and Naghash Hovnatan are not accidental.
A miscellany bearing the title Sayings of Philosophers is another very old Armenian translation similar to the works of an admonitory nature. This compilation contains various admonitions, winged words, wise expressions attributed to the great thinkers of the ancient world, and sometimes even unique tales and interesting stories attributed to Pythagoras, Democrites, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Demosthenes, Diogenes, and many other philosophers and orators. The contents of the miscellany are arranged according to the following topics: wisdom, education, friendship, power, bravery, avarice, glory, silence, intoxication, and so on. Here is an example of tales illustrating the theme of wisdom: “Empedocles said: ‘I found no wise man.’ He was told: ‘He who searches for a wise man must be wise himself’.” The following admonition is on the theme of wealth: “Socrates said, ‘Scorn him who possesses riches, but cannot enjoy them. He is like those who acquire a horse, but cannot till the soil’.” The next piece, dealing with the question of life and death, is both appropriate and beautiful: “Aristotle said: ‘One must abstain from a worldly life as one should walk away from a dinner table, neither hungry nor full, neither thirsty nor drunk.” These sundry examples could give an idea on the great appeal the Sayings of Philosophers had for the medieval Armenian readers.
Translations of fables were also equally popular in medieval Armenia. The oldest of these is considered to be the Bestiary. It is assumed that this collection of fables and tales was created in the city of Alexandria, Egypt, in the early centuries of our era. Several ancient translations of the work exist in Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopian, Arabic, and other languages. In the late Middle Ages the collection also gained much popularity in Europe, being translated several times and published in various countries. The Bestiary is a work describing the traits and habits of real and imaginary animals. Attached to each fable is an allegorical interpretation with a moral such as: “This tale indicates that one should be careful of the advice of an enemy” or “Satan in a beguiling form destroys many.” It is well known that, besides its importance for Armenian literature, the Bestiary influenced Armenian architecture by providing prototypes for the images of animals carved in relief on medieval churches.
Since ancient times the fables of Aesop had circulated in Armenia; yet, there is no extant collection of them in the corpus of medieval Armenian literature. Among the Hellenophile translations there is a collection of fables bearing the name of Olympianus. Modern studies have shown that this is a compilation made up of Aesop's fables. As no such collection is now known in Greek literature, it is assumed that the fables in the present collection were excerpted and set aside from a rhetorical handbook by the orator Olympianus, in which they were cited as examples illustrating various rhetorical rules. Like the Bestiary, Fables of Olympianus also left a deep mark on Armenian fable literature. In the Fox Book attributed to Vardan Aigektsi there are many fables taken from the above works.
The Fox Book also contains fables from the Kalila and Dimna, one of the most famous literary works of the Orient. A complete Armenian translation of this work, however, is not known. One of its longer versions, titled The Tale of the Emperor Pontianus or the Seven Philosophers, was introduced to the Armenian reader at a relatively late date. Hacob Tokhatetsi translated this story, one of the Western variants of Kalila and Dimna, from Latin into Armenian in 1614. Despite the late date at which it was translated, it enjoyed a wide circulation among the Armenians. Many copies, produced during the 17th and 18th centuries, are still extant. Between l693 and l857 it was published more than ten times. It was also translated into Turkish written in Armenian characters and into Ottoman Turkish. Its wide circulation is not surprising, if we consider the following comment by the famous philologist Fr. Nerses Akinian: “In international literature there is no other book besides the Bible that had such a wide circulation and great popularity as the Story of the Seven Philosophers.”
Among Armenian translations of secular works there are also poems. The best known of these is the Story of Paris and Vienna, a very popular story of courtly love, which had a wide circulation in medieval Europe. It was originally composed in the 14th century in Catalonia. In 1487, a French translation appeared, which served as the source for other translations and versions. From the end of the 15th century and throughout the 16th, several editions of the love story appeared in various European languages. The Armenian translation, published in Marseilles in 1587, was made by Hovhannes Terzyntsi, an early Armenian printer. An Italian versified adaptation of the story is believed to have served as the basis for the Armenian translation. The popularity and wide circulation of this love story was due to its deep sentimentality and its literary quality. In this romance the development of the love story is unfolded in a milieu of social inequality, in a relationship between master and servant. Finally, the wisdom or moral derived from the story is that all wickedness and obstacles are reduced to nothing before true love. The love between the venerable lord's daughter Vienna and the common knight Paris is met by all kinds of trials and barriers from which finally it victoriously emerges unharmed in the end. The émigré knight's visit to Armenia, added in the Armenian version, his sojourn in the city of Ani, and his travels in Eastern countries such as Syria, Egypt, Mesopotamia and Persia must have enhanced the appeal of the story in Armenian circles.
The large number of extant copies of the Patericon or Lives of the Holy Fathers and the Great Mirror suggest that these collections were also among books widely appreciated by Armenian readers. Though their purpose was didactic and moralizing, their intriguing tales and novel-like plots satisfied the esthetic taste of their readers.
The Patericon was compiled over the course of the 4th and 5th centuries in the milieu of the Egyptian hermits; later it was translated and circulated throughout the entire Christian world. The collection survives in Greek, Latin, Ethiopian, Syriac, Arabic, and Armenian versions. The latter has reached us in two redactions, designated as “the old” and “second” versions. Nerses Lambronatsi, a famous author of the Cilician period, who compiled the various sections of the collection, which had been translated at a much earlier date, undertook the first version. The second translation was also undertaken in Cilician Armenia, approximately two centuries later. The latter contains a number of new elements and a more systematic arrangement of the contents. The tales are grouped according to topics, based on the fundamental principles of hermitic morality: humility, poverty, abstinence, charity, patience, and other virtues, Here is an example of the tales condemning unbecoming conduct: “There was a man who lived with another old man, and during the meals he always put his feet on the table. The old man did not reprimand him. After a long time, the old man went to another venerable person and told him about this conduct. The elder told him: ‘Send that brother to me.’ The old man acted as he was told. When the brother arrived, the table was set for lunch and the elder put his feet on the table.
Displeased by this, the visitor was unable to restrain himself from remarking, ‘Father, it is not right to do this.’ The elder lowered his feet from the table and said: ‘You are speaking truly, brother; this is a great sin; I have sinned against God.’ The brother returned to the old man, and never again repeated his unbecoming conduct.”
The tales in the collection Great Mirror are more interesting and entertaining. These are for the most part about secular life, though they were also composed for moral and admonitory purposes. The Latin archetype of this collection was composed in 1480. In 1605, the Belgian writer John Mayor considerably expanded and reedited the collection, giving it the title Great Mirror. A Polish translation of the Great Mirror appeared in 1612, and at the end of the century another appeared in Russian. It has already been noted that the Armenian translation, which is based on the Polish version, was made by Stepanos Lehatsi in the middle of the 17th century. The Armenian version, containing 247 tales, is considerably shorter than the others. As in the Patericon, the tales are grouped according to topics and in different chapters. They ridicule and criticize the flaws of different classes of society, such as the misconduct of clerics, the rich and usurers. For example, in one of the tales under the topic “avarice”, the following story is related: “A man who possessed many coins of ancient kings became sick and went to the hospital, where he was taken in. Out of avarice he hid for a long time what he possessed and the silver he had amassed. As he was sick, he begged them to boil husked wheat. When they brought it, instead of breadcrumbs, he mixed the silver coins with the food and ate them with a great appetite. He immediately choked on them.” Here is an entertaining story from the chapter on “love of prayer”: “A pious preacher who pleased God was traveling from one place to another on a donkey in order to spread the Good Word. One day, as he entered a church in order to pray, he tied the donkey at the portal of the sanctuary. He had hardly raised his voice to heaven to say ‘I have sinned, Father’ when the thought that his donkey might be stolen preoccupied his mind. Other similar thoughts distracted him from his prayer. Seeing this, he quickly came out of the church and sold his donkey for a small price, in the hope that his mind would no longer be preoccupied by other thoughts during prayer and he would not turn away from God.”
From this short survey of the historical and cultural significance of ancient and medieval Armenian translations, one may acquire an idea about their role in the intellectual life of the Armenian people, the extent of their contribution to the dissemination of knowledge, their importance to the development of art and literature, and their preparation of the groundwork for the birth and development of an original national culture. The practice of translation tended to take on major dimensions in periods when Armenian culture was flourishing. It was at such times that the spiritual life of the Armenian people demanded new and abundant sources to satisfy its growing needs and interests.
