Armenians do not call themselves Armenians nor their country Armenia. They are descendants of Haic, as the legend goes, who was the son of Togarmah, the son of Japhet, who was the son of Noah, and they call their country Haiasdan after the patriarchal progenitor of their people.1 Haic dwelt in the plain of Shinar and was a prefect or director in the building of the tower of Babel. He was beautiful as a god and strong as a giant, mighty in battle and especially adept in spear throwing. In the days of his youth, Bel or Nimrod, who was the patron god of Babylon, established himself over all and wished to be worshipped. But Haic refused to obey, and taking his sons, who numbered about three hundred, his daughters, his sheep and cattle, he journeyed north until he came to the land of Ararat. Bel tried in vain to persuade his rival to come back.

“Thou hast departed and hast settled in a chill and frosty region,” urged the Assyrian god. “Soften thy hard pride, change thy coldness to geniality; be my subject and come and live a life of ease in my domain.”2

But Haic refused the cordial invitation, which so much angered Bel that the latter brought his army to force the Armenian hero into submission. Haic, however, was victorious, for he slew Bel with an arrow from his own bow. The place where Bel was buried is called “Kerezman,” meaning grave, and is pointed out to this day. Armenians sing songs and tell stories of the great beauty and valor of Haic. He died at the age of four hundred in about 2028 B.C.3

This oldest of Armenian legends, quaint and simple as it is in accounting for the beginnings of a people, savours of the Old Testament and is suggestive of the Assyrian invasion which took place about the ninth century before Christ. It is significant that the Armenians refused the protection of Bel, and that in the very beginning of their legendary history, they insisted on standing firm and maintaining their independence, for no single quality is more characteristic of this people than a proud, haughty, even at times disdainful independence. It is also suggestive that their patriarchal hero was no saint, but a mighty giant, beautiful as he was strong, whose greatest pride was in the throwing of a spear, for his descendants have not been a peaceful people. To be sure, they were the first nation to be converted to Christianity, which would say little for [10]their firmness and independence, were it not that the priest with the cross was followed by a powerful king with a sword at the head of an army that had learned to fight as the Romans fought.4 The songs that were sung in memory and honor of Haic are seldom sung to-day unless it be in some remote village where the civilization of the Turk has not yet pressed, and there are few such villages if any. For many of them breathe of a national spirit not beseeming a subject nation, and have been suppressed for many years.

Dating back to the Assyrian invasion which took place during the seventh and eighth centuries before Christ, one of the oldest of Armenian legends, that of Semiramis, queen of Assyria, and Ara, king of Armenia, is told.5 Ara was very beautiful, and Semiramis having heard speech of his beauty for many years, wished to possess him. But she dared do nothing for fear of Ninus, protector over Armenia. After the death of Ninus, however, the queen sent messengers to Ara, with gifts and offerings, with prayers and promises of riches, begging him to come to her at Nineveh and either wed her and reign over all that Ninus had possessed, or fulfill her desire and return in peace to Armenia with many gifts. But when the messengers had been turned away repeatedly, Semiramis became angry, and taking her army she hastened to Armenia. The battle was fought on the plain of Ara, called after him Ararat; and although the queen had given careful orders to her generals to devise some means of saving the life of Ara, the Armenian king was slain. She found the dead body among the others that had fallen, and ordered her servants to place it in an upper chamber in her castle. And when the Armenian army again arose to drive away the foe and avenge the death of Ara, the [11]queen said, “I have commanded the gods to lick his wounds and he shall live again.” She tried to bring Ara back to life by witchcraft and charms, but the body began to decay and she commanded her servants to cast the corpse into a deep pit and to cover it. And having dressed up one of her men in secret, she caused the following proclamation to be spread among the people: “The gods have licked Ara and have brought him back to life again, thus fulfilling our prayers and our pleasures. Therefore from this time forth shall they be the more glorified and worshipped by us, for they are the givers of joy and the fulfillers of desire.” And she erected a statue to the gods, making it seem as though they had brought Ara back to life again. This news was spread over all the country of Armenia, and having satisfied the people, she put an end to the fighting. The twelve-year-old son of the king was taken by the Assyrian queen and appointed ruler over Armenia. She called him Ara, in memory of her love for Ara the Beautiful.

To Semiramis is attributed the building of the ancient city of Van on the shores of the beautiful lake of Van, where she made her summer residence until the time of her departure.6 She might well have lingered there, for the Armenians have a proverb, “Van in this world, paradise in the next.” Nevertheless, Semiramis and Ara are mythical characters, although the latter is spoken of in the history of St. Martin as having lived along about 1769 B.C.7 As regards the popular belief in the legend, however, there is not the slightest doubt. This is proved by the fact that even to-day the city is called “Sham-iram-agerd” by the Armenians, meaning the city of Semiramis. Lynch says that Ara and Semiramis are Tannuz and Istar, the Adonis and the Aphrodite of the Hellenic myth, and that the quest of the Assyrian queen may be connected with the introduction into Armenia of the worship of Istar whose name is mentioned in one of the cuneiform inscriptions at Van.8 However, the results of modern scholarship are by no means conclusive on this point, as we shall see.

Moses’ history was read by St. Martin who became exceedingly interested in Van, and in the cuneiform inscriptions spoken of. It was due to him that the French government dispatched a mission to Armenia in 1827, under the direction of a young German Professor, Friedrich Edward Schulz. Schulz was murdered by the Kurds, a thing which rarely happens in Armenia, and his work was left incomplete. He had succeeded, however, in making copies of forty-two inscriptions, which were published [12]in 1840, and proved to be remarkably accurate. Shortly afterward, orientalists made great discoveries in the Mesopotamian valley, but the inscriptions at Van did not tally with any syllabaries discovered up to that time, nor could they be translated in any known language. A number of them were found to be Assyrian, but the great majority were peculiar to Van, and entirely baffled the students. Not until 1880 were they finally unravelled. M. S. Guyard discovered at that time that the concluding phrase of many Vannic texts represented an imprecatory formula found in exactly the same place in Assyrian counterparts. This discovery enabled Professor Sayce, of Oxford, to decipher the inscriptions at a rapid rate.

Among the important facts discovered were that the nation was a rival nation of Assyria, and that its people were called Khaldeans, or children of Khaldis, much in the same way as the Assyrians reflected the name of their god, Assur. The country was a theocracy and Khaldis was supreme. In the tablets, his wrath was invoked against whomever should destroy them. The capital city was Dhuspus, modern Van, which is the Disp, or Tsp of Armenian writers, and the Turuspa of Assyrian annals. The Assyrians styled the kingdom Urardhu, or Urarthu, which is the name appearing in the Bible in the familiar form Ararat.

The earliest inscriptions date back to the ninth century before Christ, and as the language is neither Semitic nor Indo-European, the people could neither have been Assyrians whose language was Semitic, nor Armenians, whose language is Indo-European. The first mention made of Urardhu was in the reign of Ashur-Nazir-Pal (885–860 B.C.) whose successor, Shalmanasar II (860–825 B.C.) was the first Assyrian king to invade Armenia.9 Raffi, however, (the son of the famous Armenian poet) speaks of an account given by Assur-Nazir-Haban (1882–1857 B.C.) of one of his victories. “They” (i.e., the people of Ararat or Urarthu), he said, “fled to the impregnable mountains so that I might not be able to get at them, for the mighty summits were like drawn swords pointing to the skies. Only the birds of heaven soaring on their wings could reach them. In three days I was there spreading terror in places where they had taken refuge. Their corpses like autumn leaves filled the clefts. The rest escaped to distant inaccessible heights.”10 This, clearly, is a much older record than any that Lynch found trace of, and although Raffi cites no authority for the quotation, I presume that it has been taken from a recent discovery. If this be true the Khaldeans were a very ancient people. One of the tablets shows that King Memas was the principal author of the magnificent canal which conducts the water of the river [13]Khoshab to the suburbs of Van, and which is to-day called “Shamiram-Su” or river of Semiramis.11 The line of Vannic kings is traceable as far down as 644 B.C.

Most of these inscriptions are to be found on a huge isolated rock, situated in the curve of the bay, and known as the “rock of Van.”12 Among them are inscriptions left by Xerxes (485 B.C.), the Persian conqueror whose father’s empire (Darius, 521–486 B.C.) succeeded the loose Scythian rule.

But the ancient Khaldean kingdom had already vanished when Xerxes’ victorious army overran the country, for shortly after the great influx of Scythians and the break-up of Assyria, came another horde from the west, perhaps to fill up the void left by the Scythian ravages. It is at this time that the Armenian people are first heard from, and it is this horde, therefore, that is regarded as the foundation stock of the Armenian people. They seem to have been an Indo-European people residing in the territory north of the Black Sea, for, coming from the west they must have entered Asia from Europe by crossing the straits. The ancient Khaldeans were assimilated to some extent, but for the most part, they were driven to the north and south, where they have left traces that have been recognized and recorded by Xenophon and Herodotus.13

That the civilization and culture of the ancient Khaldeans were utilized is beyond doubt. Their most ancient cities, Van, Armavir, were foundations of Vannic kings, while recently it has been disclosed that the city of Hajk, southeast of Van, shows some of the familiar features of a Khaldean settlement. But their supreme god during the pre-Christian era was not Khaldis, but the Persian Ormuzd, which indicates that the Persians exercised an even greater influence.

How then could Semiramis ever have come to Van in quest of an Armenian king, since it seems that the Scythians had already conquered Assyria before the great influx of Armenian hordes? Nor does it seem that the city of Van was built by the Assyrian queen, for the inscriptions make no mention of her name. King Memas who, in the view of Lynch, constructed the famous canal, was in all probability the author of the garden city. The belief, according to Lynch, as already stated, is that this legend is the Armenian version of the old Hellenic myth of Aphrodite and Adonis, taken over during the domination of the Seleucid dynasty which followed the conquest of Alexander about 325 B.C.14

But this is unreasonable. That a myth should be taken over by a subject people and the characters rechristened is not difficult to understand, [14]but that the name of one of them should be applied to the ancient city is very improbable to say the least. Furthermore, the legend is flavored rather strongly with Persian voluptuousness, and is not at all suggestive of Greek delicacy and refinement. Nor is the fact that the horde overran the country after the destruction of Assyria in any way conclusive, for if there were any assimilation at all, as there must unquestionably have been, the Khaldean culture and history was to that extent the actual possession of the Armenians. Even intermarriage would perhaps be unnecessary, for what Irishman who has been in the United States two months does not speak of Benjamin Franklin and George Washington as his forefathers? It is to be noted also that to this day the canal spoken of is called “Shamiram-Su” or river of Semiramis, by all Armenians.15 On the whole it seems to me conclusive, therefore, that the legend of Semiramis and Ara has its roots in Armenian history, and is not at all a version of the Hellenic myth.

The legend of Vahakn, king and god of Armenians, is very clearly attributable to the Greek period, which followed the Persian conquest under Xerxes. Vahakn was deified because of his great valor and made the fire-god of the Armenian people.16 He was called “Vishapakagh,” uprooter of dragons, since he cleared Armenia of monsters and saved it from evil influences. His exploits were known in the abode of the gods as well as in Armenia. The most famous of them was the theft of corn from the barns of King Barsham of Assyria, from whom he ran away and tried to hide in heaven. Because of the ears he dropped in his rapid flight, there arose the Milky Way which is called in Armenian the “track of the corn stealer.”17

Moses of Khorene writes as follows:

The wife of Vahakn was Astghik, the goddess of beauty, a personification of the moon, corresponding to the Phoenician and Sidonian Astarte. This is suggestive of Greek influence, for Venus, the Greek goddess of beauty, was also the wife of a fire-god, Vulcan.20

The flight of Vahakn before the Assyrian king is certainly more suggestive of the fear in which the Assyrians must have been regarded than of the valor of their god. The originators of the legend were good psychologists, however, in regarding the instincts of fear and of pugnacity as compatible. For even the slayer of demons must some day face his superiors in strength, and when he does, will he not be afraid? In fact he would be more afraid than another, for he could not well impute more mercy to his superior than he himself had shown to his inferiors.

The vein of humor is too rich to be left unnoted. If the Greeks could laugh at their gods, and even mock them, the Armenians could also make sport of them. For what could be more delightfully humorous than the picture of a bearded god, a slayer of dragons, whose hair was of flame and whose eyes like suns, stealing corn from the Assyrian king and dropping the ears from his shoulders in his hasty flight across heaven? The character thus brought out, together with the richness of imaginative quality, especially in the song of his birth, the wholesome and unveiled anthropomorphism (wholesome because it is unveiled), and the correspondence between the Greek fire-god Vulcan whose wife was Venus, the goddess of beauty, with the fire-god Vahakn whose wife Astghik was also goddess of beauty, stamp the legend with its unmistakable origin in Greek mythology.

The Greek period from which this legend dates began with the defeat of the Armenian king Vahy, who was overcome by Alexander the [16]Great somewhere about 328 B.C.21 The Greeks chose their own representative to rule over the province, who at the time of Alexander’s death was Seleucus. Historians have taken the name of this governor to indicate the dynasty of Greek supremacy which followed; i.e., the Seleucid dynasty. This method of the Greeks of selecting their own man to govern a subject people, which was of course in pursuance of their policy of superimposing their own culture upon all subject nations, was contrary to the policy of the Parthians, Romans, and Persians, who allowed the Armenians to maintain their national independence provided they permitted the use of their armies and duly paid their taxes. And it is this policy of the Greeks that accounts for the fact that large portions of Greek mythology and religion were taken over by the Armenians.

Although the period of political supremacy was short-lived, the influence of Greek culture continued to permeate the social life of the people through the reign of the Arsacid kings.22 In 246 B.C. Arsaces, a Parthian, made himself master of the Parthians, Persians, Medes, Babylonians, and lastly Armenians.23 His grandson, Arsaces the Great, conquered as far as India, and after seating himself securely upon the throne of Persia, placed his brother Valarsace upon the Armenian throne, so founding the Persian and Armenian Arsacid dynasties (150 B.C.).24 The Persian Arsacidae became extinct in A.D. 226 when they were overthrown by the Persian Sasanidae, whereas the Armenian Arsacidae line continued up until A.D. 428, when the Armenian kingdom was divided between Persia and Rome by Shapuh, the Persian monarch, and Theodosius II.25 This makes a period of 578 years (150 B.C.-A.D. 428) during which Armenia was governed by her own line of kings, and enjoyed the liberties of national independence. To be sure after the conquest of Lucullus and Pompey (66 B.C.) Armenia became tributary to Rome, but the right of succession remained with the Armenian royal family, even during Roman supremacy, so that the national life was in no manner interfered with.26 [17]The greatest Armenian king of the Arsacidae line was Tigranes the Great, who extended his domains by conquest and established himself in his capital, Tigranacerta, with a court of matchless splendor.27 He is spoken of by historians as a king of kings, and as having ruled with a pomp, splendor, and pride never before known. Defeated by Pompey within the walls of his own capital city, his kingdom became tributary to Rome.

The continuity of the period of the Armenian Arsacidae makes it the time when the process of national solidification and unification was carried out to the point that made Armenia a nation, and beyond this point. Raffi asserts that the introduction of Greek culture during the Arsacid dynasty not only changed the religion of Armenians, but also so affected their language and customs that they became different from the Persians, which is proof that a process of social readjustment was going on.28 It was during this period that the wandering minstrels spoken of by Langlois journeyed from one end of the nation to the other, singing their songs, repeating the national legends, relating the news of the world and the court gossip which probably made up the largest portion of it.

This is putting the case conservatively, for Moses speaks often of “les chantres” and “les chants.” They traveled as far as Persia and returned, for it is related by the Italian Countess Evelyn Martinengo how a wandering minstrel, who had just returned from that country, was entertained by an Armenian patriarchal family living in the kind of underground [18]habitation described in the beginning of this thesis.30 No one was ever more welcome than the minstrel. He was assigned to the guest chamber usually prepared especially for him, and always the best chamber in the household. His head and feet were washed for him by the wife of the patriarch, and at meal time all the delicacies of the household were spread before him. All guests were welcome, but no guest more welcome than the minstrel. They must have listened to his tales in a kind of petrified awe, and heard him sing his songs in speechless enjoyment.

It was a practice among the minstrels of the time to compete with each other in public, and it is related how two minstrels entertained by a Persian prince were led out upon an open grass plot and seated, one facing the other. Five thousand people made a circle around the competitors while the rivals contended in song and verse, riddle and repartee. Each began where the other left off, until finally one failed to perceive the drift of his adversary, and answering at random, the spectators proclaimed him beaten. The triumphant bard was led to the vanquished, whose lyre was taken from him and broken. Robed in a prince’s mantle, the victor was taken to the highest seat in the banquet hall.

That the people were the judges of the contest, indicates how well they must have been acquainted with the current folk-songs, legends, and tradition. How generally and frequently the custom of minstrel competition was practiced throughout Armenia is not known, but it certainly is proof, besides Moses’ own statements to the same effect, that the national legends and folk-songs were the possession of the common people. And what is more important, this same body of legends, folk-songs, and tradition did more than any other one thing to weld the sentiments of the people into a single national sentiment, which crystallized into a real patriotism, a real loyalty and devotion to any cause that was a national cause, because it was the natural, spontaneous expression of the life and thought of the people, and no mean, artificial thing superimposed from outside.31

There are other reasons for giving this period the social importance that I have ascribed to it. The conversion of the people to Christianity about the third century after Christ was achieved in no sentimental fashion, but, as I believe, in a manner in which it alone could have been done, namely, at the point of the sword of their own king, Tiridates, who was converted from paganism to Christianity by Gregory the Illuminator. The traditions in connection with this important event will be told later. Suffice it to say at this point that the whole process of conversion was carried out so thoroughly and completely, that it may be described as a national volte-face, and therefore did not result in the disintegration, [19]civil strife, and social chaos that would unquestionably have been the result had the process been carried out by means of peaceful penetration and propaganda.

The third and last argument in support of the social and national importance of the period of the Arsacid kings is in respect to the alphabet which was compiled by St. Mesrob Maschtotz. St. Mesrob was a former secretary of the king, and desired to extirpate the last remnants of paganism in the province of Akoulis, but in the absence of an alphabet he was unable to carry out any scheme of propaganda. He therefore besought the king, Vramschapouh, to put an end to this state of things and the latter, in response to the request, placed all available material at the disposal of the saint. The task was accomplished in 404, somewhat at the expense of the future devotees of the language, for the alphabet contains thirty-eight letters.32 Nevertheless, most of the sounds of foreign languages were represented, making it particularly useful as a foundation language for other languages. St. Mesrob, with a body of translators trained by himself and St. Sahak, then proceeded to the translation of the Bible, which was not completed until 433. Liturgies and song-books quickly followed. To be sure the effect of the invention of the alphabet and the distribution of the various religious publications that followed were not felt during the period of the Arsacidae, for the Bible was not published until after the break-up of the kingdom in 428, when it was divided between Persia and Rome. But the important point is that the time had come when the need for an alphabet was making itself very strongly felt, and this could not have been true of a diversified, heterogeneous population.

For the three reasons above mentioned, i.e., first, the work of minstrels, second, the Christianizing of the nation, and third, the invention of the alphabet, all occurring during the successive reigns of the Arsacid kings, I should ascribe to this period (150 B.C.-A.D. 428) the integration of the Armenian people into a national unit.33 Christianity must have come as a disrupting force, as a terrible shock, necessitating a complete social readjustment, but the fact that the readjustment was made shows that the people were ready for it. For better or for worse the yoke of Christianity was fastened to the neck of the people, and with it they had to [20]replow the social soil. The job was a good one, for the Armenian church has been the chief power during the last ten or fifteen centuries in keeping alive the streams of national life, and in holding the people together in the face of invasion and repeated attempts at proselytization by the Persians and by the Greek and Roman Catholic churches.

The legends of Artasches and Satenik, and of Artavasd, the son of Artasches, belong to the Arsacid period, for Artavasd and Artasches are Armenian kings of the Arsacid dynasty, according to Moses.34 The Alans who, according to the legend, were a neighboring people residing in the mountain region in the vicinity of Georgia, spread themselves over Armenia while Artasches, the Armenian king, collected a great army and forced the Alans to retreat across the river Kur where they pitched camp. The son of the Alan king was taken captive and brought to Artasches, which forced the former to seek peace on whatever terms the Armenian king might wish, provided only his son was returned in safety. But Artasches refused, whereupon the sister of the captured boy came to the river bank, and standing upon a great rock spoke to the camp of Artasches by means of interpreters saying: “Oh brave Artasches, who hast vanquished the great nation of Alans, unto thee I speak. Come, hearken unto the bright-eyed daughter of the Alan king and give back the youth. For it is not the way of heroes to destroy life at the root, nor for the sake of humbling and enslaving a hostage to establish everlasting enmity between two great nations.”35 Artasches, having heard of these sayings went to the river bank and having seen that the girl was beautiful, and listened to her words of wisdom, wished to marry her. His chamberlain considered it a wise stroke of policy, and therefore went to the Alan king, soliciting the hand of the princess for his master, whose oaths and assurances of peace he vouched for, together with the promise to return the boy. The king of the Alans answered, “From whence shall brave Artasches give thousands upon thousands, and ten thousands upon tens of thousands in return for the maiden?”

Writes Moses:

The couplet quoted is still sung by the Armenians, and it is still customary for the bridegroom to scatter money on his way to the church, and though it may be for queens to scatter pearls, the Armenian bride is not to be outdone. She is given a partly opened pomegranate which she throws at the door of the bridegroom upon the arrival at the bridegroom’s home after the ceremony at the church, the bits of pomegranate scattering themselves about as pearls.

After fifty-one years of a very prosperous reign, Artasches, who was very much beloved by his people, died. The funeral procession was a most magnificent one, and many of the people killed themselves, out of love for their dead king, according to the custom of the time. And when the body was laid in the grave they threw precious jewels, gold, and silver after it. Nor did the lamenting and suicide stop after his burial, for upon the grave of their dead king the nobles and the people continued to kill themselves. So great was the slaughter that Artavasd, son of Artasches, and king after his father’s death, addressed the spirit of his dead father, saying, “Behold, thou art taking all with thee; dost thou leave me to rule over ruins and the dead?” The words given by Moses of Khorene are: “Now that thou art gone, and hast taken with thee the whole land, how shall I reign over the ruins?”37 Whereupon the spirit of Artasches cursed him and said,

[22]

These words together with those of Artavasd spoken to his father’s spirit were sung by the singers of the time.39

One day while out hunting Artavasd was seized by some visionary terror and lost his reason. Urging his horse down a steep bank he fell into a chasm where he sank and disappeared. Old women told how he was confined in a cavern and bound with iron chains which his two dogs gnawed at daily in order to set him free. But somehow at the sound of the hammers striking on the anvils, the chains were continually strengthened, and it was customary among the blacksmiths of the time to strike the anvil three or four times to strengthen, as they said, the chains of Artavasd. And so the tradition was kept up by singers and blacksmiths; the blacksmiths and old women having consigned the jealous king to the world’s nethermost regions, while the singers left him to the solitude of Ararat in accordance with the curse of Artasches.

Such are the ancient legends of Armenia, in their respective historical settings: the legends of Haic, of Semiramis and Ara, of Vahakn, of Artasches and Satenik, and of Artavasd. All of them antedate the Christian era, and some of them by many centuries. Each one of them is told by Moses of Khorene. But as to origin and probable historic roots Moses was silent, for he was writing a history. He constantly laments the absolute dearth of material and sources and begins his accounts of these legends with the words “This is as it is told,” or “the singers say,” indicating that his only sources for them were the songs and reports current among the people during his own time. The legends of Haic and of Semiramis and Ara are told by Moses as though he believed them historic fact, but of course Moses had no materials to serve as a basis of criticism. He is careful to quote Mar Apas Catina as his only source for this material. The other three legends are regarded as such. Artavasd is spoken of as an historical king who lost his reason while riding horseback and fell into a deep chasm. The practice of suicide at the death of Artasches, his father, was a pagan custom. The curse of the spirit of the dead father, the chains, the dogs, and the anvils were of course recognized as the work of ingenious fancy. In view therefore, of the questionable character of Moses’ sources these legends have very little historic value. They do, however, have a high social value inasmuch as the common knowledge of them among the people was the only ultimate source at the disposal of the historian.

The second conclusion is that these legends formed a very important part of the larger mass of tradition and songs that served to cement [23]the people into a nation. Just how important, it would be difficult to say, but the fact that they were current at the time Moses wrote indicates that they were current and passed on from generation to generation during the whole period of the Arsacidae kings. And as the people had no alphabet during this whole period, they must have been passed on by song and word of mouth. This was a time of special activity on the part of the minstrels and singers, and therefore the development of the national consciousness characteristic of the period must have been brought about in a large measure through the medium of these legendary beliefs.

Furthermore these legends are known by the Armenian people to-day and are taught in the schools that are not too severely under the rules of Turkish and Russian censorship. Naturally enough, they are a source of great pride since they breathe national independence and loyalty. But of course, the Turks and Russians have suppressed all public singing of songs, and public teaching of history and legend that may possibly be construed as partaking of the national spirit.

It may be argued that these legends slumbered between the covers of Moses’ history during the centuries known as the dark ages, and that they had no social value until the contagion of the European spirit of the Renaissance awoke the legends and the people at the same time. But the mere dearth of record is no proof of this Rip Van Winkle theory. There is at least one reliable authority sufficient to disprove it, viz., Grigor Magistros, a scholar of the eleventh century who wrote that he heard the Artasches epic sung by minstrels.40 Besides the unreasonableness of the supposition, there is the added fact of an independent Armenian kingdom known as the Bagradouni dynasty, whose capital seat was at the famous city of Ani. This kingdom included greater Armenia and continued from A.D. 887 to 1079.41 But 1079 does not mark the end of Armenian independence though it marks the destruction of Ani, for Reuben, a member of the royal family, made his way into Cilicia in the year 1080, and rallying a handful of Armenians about him, overpowered the Greeks and founded what is known as the Rupenian Kingdom of Cilicia, which continued during a period of 300 years. So that here again is a period of very nearly five hundred years (889–1380), during which time the Armenian people enjoyed national political independence.42 And this during the very period of the dark ages, about which we know so little! We could not, therefore, for a moment suppose the traditions and legends to have had no social importance during these centuries, for such an assumption would be in flat contradiction to the witness of Grigor Magistros, and to the facts of Armenian history. [24]

The second body of legends which I wish to consider is chiefly concerned with the introduction of Christianity into the country. These, together with the traditional beliefs centered about the chief geographical feature of the land, Mt. Ararat, constitute a group bearing a very distinct religious stamp. For this reason, and also because they have a later origin, they are to be marked off very distinctly from those already taken up. In view of their religious bearing I shall introduce them with a brief account of the various forms of pagan worship that preceded the Christianization of the people.

The chief religious influences have been the Assyrian, the Persian, and the Greek. It seems, however, that a kind of monotheism prevailed before the gods of any of these were taken over. The very ancient Armenian kings planted groves of poplars around their cities and the worship was carried on in these groves.1 An altar was placed among the trees, where the first male descendant of the royal family (and perhaps other families) offered sacrifices to the one God, while the priests derived oracles from the rustling of the leaves. Even now the poplar groves are held in uncommon regard. This is a survival of the old belief that they were the dwelling place of God, and of the later practice of consecrating children in them. The belief that God dwelt among the leaves must have been suggested by the slightest trembling of the leaves, even at the gentlest breeze, and one can well imagine the people looking up at them in the impressive silence of the forest with an awe and wonder no other environment could possibly induce. The Armenian for poplar, “Sossi” is used to-day as a name for girls, and the poplar tree, although not held sacred by Armenian people to-day, is certainly regarded with great reverence.2

The influence of Persian worship is more clear. Aramazd, the architect of the universe, lord and creator of all things, was the chief [25]Armenian god, and is unquestionably the Persian Ormuzd named in the inscription of Xerxes on the rock of Van. Armenians have given him the title of “father of the gods,” and the qualifications “great, and strong, creator of heaven and earth, and god of fertility and of abundance.” The Greeks identified him with Zeus.3 There were numerous sanctuaries erected in his honor, and at the annual festival celebrated in his name, white animals, especially goats, horses, and mules, were sacrificed and their blood used to fill silver and golden goblets.4 Tir, or “Grogh” meaning in Armenian “to write” was his attendant spirit, whose chief business it was to watch over mankind, recording their good and evil deeds.5 Upon the death of a person “Grogh” conducted the soul of the departed before his master, who opened the great book, and balancing the good and evil deeds, assigned a reward or punishment. Grogh is also the personification of hope and fear, and the expression “may Grogh take you” is still very commonly used among the people, especially by servant girls and those whose language has not undergone the purification of a season of “Sturm und Drang.” It is interesting to note that this and some other expressions owe their survival to usage among women rather than among men, which is not difficult of explanation when one considers the social restrictions that women are generally subject to. “Viele Seiten des alten heidnischen Glaubens sind in dem heutigen Volksglauben, besonders bei den tiefer stehenden Volksschichten, bei alten Bauerinnen, als überbleibsel der Vergangenheit erhalten.”6

The god Mihr represented fire, and was the son of Aramazd.7 He guided heroes in battle, and was commemorated by a festival held in the beginning of spring. Fires were kindled in the open market place in his honor, and a lantern lit from one of these fires was kept burning in his temple throughout the year.8 It is still a festival among the people, although it has a different significance, and will be described more in detail later on. This is practiced not only by the Armenians, but also by the Syrian Maronites who reside in the Lebanon. I have seen the mountainsides literally aglow with a thousand fires in celebration of a Christian festival that has its roots in the pagan ceremony in honor of Mihr. The practice of a continually burning lantern was also carried over by some branches of the Christian church. [26]

Both Persians and Armenians were worshippers of Mihr (fire-worship), although there was a very distinct difference between the two. The Armenian sacred fire was invisible, whereas the Persian was material and kept up throughout the whole year. It is for this reason that the Armenians called the Persians fire-worshippers. The only visible fire-god worshipped by the Armenians was the sun, to which temples were dedicated, and after which the Armenian calendar month “Areg” was named.9 The “Children of the Sun” as they were called, offered the most persistent opposition to the introduction of Christianity, and a community of them continued their worship in the face of persecution after Christianity became the religion of the state. The phrase “let me die for your sun,” and the oath “let the sun of my son be witness,” are language survivals of this particular worship.

The Greek worship, introduced first during the Seleucid dynasty, and emphasized and encouraged by the line of Arsacidae kings up to the introduction of Christianity, exercised an even stronger influence than the Persian. Many of the Greek divinities were rechristened and adopted by the people. Chief of these was Anahit, “Mother of Chastity,” known also as the “Pure and Spotless Goddess,” who was the daughter of Aramazd, and corresponded to the Greek Artemid and the Roman Diana.10 She was also regarded as the benefactress of the people. Writes Agathangelus: “Through her (Anahit) the Armenian land exists; from her it draws its life, she is the glory of our nation and its protectress.”11 Images and shrines were dedicated to her name under the titles, “The Golden Mother,” “The Being of Golden Birth.” A summer festival was celebrated in her honor at which a dove and a rose were offered to her golden image. The day was called “Vartavar,” meaning “the flaming of the rose.” The temples of Anahit and the golden image were destroyed with the conversion of the people to Christianity, but the festival has continued as a regular church festival under the same name “Vartavar” though of course with a different meaning.

The second and third daughters of Aramazd were Astghik, the goddess of beauty, and Nane, or Noone, the goddess of contrivance.12 The former was the wife of Vahakn, the mythical king-god, the legend in respect to whom has been told, and corresponded to the Phoenician and [27]Sidonian Astarte. It is stated by Raffi that the goddess of contrivance was a necessary power to womankind, for then as now woman had to make big things out of small. Sandaramet, the wife of Aramazd, was an invisible goddess and personification of the earth. Her master sent rain upon her, and brought forth vegetation. Later she became the synonym for Hades. Perhaps the best summary of Armenian worship as existing before the Christian time is that given by St. Martin.

Anahit, however, was goddess of chastity, and did not therefore correspond to Venus.14

The first connection that Armenians had with Christianity occurred in the reign of King Abgar, whose capital was at Edessa (now Ourfa) during the time of Christ’s teaching in Palestine.15 The story is legendary and very popular. Abgar was called a great man because of his exceeding meekness and wisdom. As the result of several severe military campaigns, the health of the king began to give way. This led to complications which developed into a very painful disease. It was at this time that Abgar sent two of his messengers to the Roman governor, Marinus, to show the Roman a treaty of peace that had been made between Ardasches and his brother of Persia, who had quarreled and had been reconciled by their kinsman Abgar; for the Romans suspected that Abgar had gone to Persia in order to collect and direct a Persian-Armenian army against the Romans.16 To clear himself of all suspicion, therefore, those two messengers were sent to show the treaty of peace to the Roman governor. On their return the messengers went up to Jerusalem in order to see Christ, having heard of his wonderful deeds. And when they returned to their king, Abgar, they told of the works of Christ, at which the king marveled, and believed him to be the very Son of God. The king, because of his sickness, sent Christ [28]a letter asking him to come and heal him of his disease. The letter is quoted as follows:

The messengers delivered the message to Jesus in Jerusalem, to which the gospel bears witness in the words, “There were some amongst the heathen that came up to him.” But Jesus could do no more than to send a letter in reply.

This letter was duly delivered to Abgar, with the image of the Saviour, which was still kept in Edessa at the time of Moses’ writing. The legend concerning the image is somewhat as follows. One of the three messengers sent to Jesus with the letter of Abgar was an artist who was told to paint a portrait of Jesus in case the latter found it impossible to take the journey. The artist tried in vain to paint a good picture, and having noticed him, Jesus took a handkerchief and passing it over his face a most exact likeness was stamped upon it, which he gave to the artist to be given to the king.

The quaint ending of Abgar’s letter is worth the whole legend. What could be simpler or more seductive than the invitation, “My city is a small one, but it is beautiful, and it is sufficient for us twain.”

The tradition of the Armenian church, or the Gregorian church, as it is more commonly called, acknowledges St. Thaddeus and St. Bartholomew as the original founders, who are therefore designated as the first illuminators of Armenia.19 Concerning the recognition of the tradition [29]of St. Bartholomew, which includes his apostolic journeys, his preaching, and his martyrdom in Armenia, all Christian churches are unanimous. The name Albanus given as the place of his martyrdom, is the same as the name Albacus, hallowed by the Armenian tradition. His mission covered a period of sixteen years (A.D. 44–60). There is difference of opinion, however, in regard to the dates.

The traditions about St. Thaddeus vary. Some suppose him to have been the brother of St. Thomas, and according to these, he traveled to Ardaze by way of Edessa. There is an anachronism, however, in this tradition which would transfer the mission of Thaddeus to the second century. According to a second tradition he is not the brother of Thomas, but one St. Judas Thaddeus, surnamed Lebbeus, who also is said to have established a sanctuary of worship at Ardaze, a circumstance admitted by the Greek and Latin churches. The Armenian church places the time of this mission as a period of eight years from 35–43. That this has been done to lay a strong foundation for the claim of apostolic origin may be suspected, especially in view of the belief that apostolic origin is essential to every Christian church, in order, as stated by Ormanian, “to place her in union with her Divine Founder.” The church, however, has us at its mercy, for conclusive evidence one way or another is lacking. Nevertheless, the fact of Thaddeus’ mission to Armenia wherever and whenever it might have occurred, is undisputed.20

The matter is not especially important except to theologians with their doctrines of “apostolic origins.” What is perfectly clear is that both these men did their work in comparative silence, and that they did not make very much headway, for if they had there would have been less doubt concerning the traditions. The great work was done by King Tiridates, and Gregory, who converted him about A.D. 301. The traditions concerning these men are among the most cherished possessions of the Armenian church.

These traditions have their historical setting in the reign of Tiridates, and of Chosroes the father of Tiridates.21 Just as there was an Arsacid dynasty in Armenia, dating and originating in the Parthian conquests and supremacy, so also was there an Arsacid dynasty of Persia. The Persian king at the time of Chosroes was a kinsman of the latter, called [30]Ardavan, who was overthrown (A.D. 227) by a Persian prince of the province of Fars, named Ardashir.22 His dynasty, a very powerful one, known as the Sassanid dynasty, supplanted the Arsacid dynasty of Persia. Chosroes of Armenia, fearing future difficulty with the new Persian monarch, ardently supported his dethroned kinsman. The next year (228), therefore, he led a huge army beyond the frontiers of Persia, and laid waste her provinces to the gates of Ctesiphon.23 The war was continued for ten years, during which time the Armenian capital, Vagharshapat, was filled with the booty of successful raids. The reigning Caesar, Severus, also alarmed by the success of the new Persian king, headed a Roman army against Ardashir. Realizing the jeopardy of his position, the Persian resolved to put Chosroes out of the way by whatever means possible. A Parthian of the royal blood, Anak by name, consented to execute his king’s desire, and went with his family to Vagharshapat as a refugee. A friendship sprang up between himself and his future victim, enabling him to execute his purpose, which he did in company with his brother while preparation was being made for a spring campaign. But the murderers were cut off in their escape by Armenian horsemen and precipitated into the Araxes, while the dying king gave orders to massacre the family of Anak. Only two of the children were rescued, one of whom was Gregory, the Illuminator, founder of the Armenian national church, called also the Gregorian church. The child Gregory was taken to Cesarea where he was educated in the tenets of Christianity.24

Ardashir died shortly after the murder of his foe, and thus failed to follow up his advantage except for a few raids into Armenian territory. Tiridates, a child at this time, was the oldest son of Chosroes, and as heir to the Armenian throne was the chief obstacle in the way of the ambitions of his uncles, whose treatment of the young king compelled him to take refuge in Rome where he was educated.25 Having distinguished himself by personal bravery in a Gothic campaign, his nation’s dominions were restored to him by the support of a Roman army, for during his absence Armenia was invaded by Shapur, the successor of Ardashir. The Persian king had taken advantage of the disputes of Tiridates’ uncles. The remainder of the story is legendary.

Gregory had been informed in the meantime of his father’s deed, and seeking to make such amends for it as he could, he journeyed to Rome, where he attached himself as a servant to the exiled king, Tiridates. The latter, after his victory over the Persians and his re-accession to the [31]Armenian throne, entered the temple of Anahit in company with his faithful servant Gregory, to offer sacrifices of thanksgiving. A feast followed the ceremony, at which many guests were present, and Tiridates, who must have known of Gregory’s attachment to Christianity, commanded the latter to make an offering of garlands to the great goddess. Gregory refused. The king was angry. “How dare you,” exclaimed the king, “adore a god whom I do not adore?” Persuasion and finally torture were used to coerce the pious and firm-minded youth, but to no avail. In the meantime, Tiridates had been informed as to Gregory’s identity, i.e., that he was the son of his father’s murderer, whereupon the king commanded that Gregory be cast into a deep pit where he was left to perish.26

For thirteen years Gregory languished in his well, and was only saved from death by the ministrations of a widow who resided in the castle of Artaxata just by the pit. This was done in great secret, for Tiridates had issued an edict which admonished his subjects to beware of the resentment of the gods, of Aramazd, Anahit, and Vahakn, and following the practice of the Romans, to lay hands on all offenders against the gods, chief of whom, evidently, were the Christians. They were to be bound hand and foot, brought before the gate of the palace, and if found guilty their lands and chattels were assigned to their accusers.27

While Christians were being robbed, and Gregory was slowly perishing of misery in his prison well, there arrived at Vagharshapat a Roman virgin of exquisite beauty, named Rhipsime, in company with her nurse Gaiane, and thirty-three followers who were also virgins. They had fled from the Emperor Diocletian, who had selected Rhipsime for his spouse, after a most careful search of his kingdom for the most beautiful of women.28 Rhipsime, unfortunately had taken a vow of chastity, and there was nothing to do but to flee. Meanwhile an ambassador from Rome arrived at the court of the Armenian king bearing a letter in which Tiridates was informed of the flight of the virgin to his land, and bidden to discover the refugees, to send Rhipsime to Rome, and to kill her companions. The emperor added, however, in truly generous fashion, that he might himself marry her if he was overcome by her charms.

The band was found, Rhipsime was recognized, and the king sent an escort of litters to bring them to his court. As Diocletian suspected, the Armenian king also fell in love, for the maiden, having refused the pomp of a royal equipage, was forced to appear before him in court. The Armenian’s suit was likewise a failure. Rhipsime would marry, provided he became Christian, which the king took as mockery. Again the girl [32]succeeded in escaping, but she was tracked, overtaken with her companions, bound with cords, and put to death with great cruelty. Both Rhipsime and her nurse Gaiane are commemorated on the calendar of saints, and at Etchmiadzin, the religious center of the nation, there are three edifices; the largest and most important bears the name of St. Gregory, while the other two respectively bear the names of the two saints, Rhipsime and Gaiane.

Agathangelus relates the legend in his Histoire du Règne de Tiridate but unfortunately the book has been tampered with and now contains much questionable material.29 There are mentioned ominous thunderclaps, openings of heaven, divine voices exhorting Rhipsime to stand firm in her faith, and the transformation of Tiridates into a grass-eating boar which was the punishment for his great crime. The sister of the king, Khosrovitukht, had a vision, in which she was told that the only remedy was to send for a prisoner named Gregory, who had been cast into a well some thirteen years before. A rope was let down into the cavern, and to the astonishment of all, there emerged a human form, blackened to the color of coal. It was none other than Gregory. He also saw visions and heard divine voices speak through curious openings in heaven. Strange columns of fire and flaming crosses of light appeared to him in the places where Rhipsime and Gaiane suffered martyrdom; and there appeared a great deal more to him which is recorded, even as there must have appeared yet more which is not recorded. The result of all of this was that Gregory ordered the construction of two chapels, one to be erected in honor of Rhipsime, the other in memory of Gaiane, both of which are still standing in Etchmiadzin. Etchmiadzin means, “the place where the Only-Begotten descended” for it was at this place that Gregory beheld his miraculous vision. Having prayed for the healing of the king, the horns fell from the royal head, and Tiridates, now a Christian, shared in the work of constructing the chapels.30 He ascended Ararat and returned with huge blocks of stone which he laid at the portals of the chapels in expiation of his sin. It was customary among Armenians to place [33]huge blocks of stone at the entrance of a church by way of offering. Dubois de Montpèreux saw a number of such stones, six or seven feet high, in front of the cathedral at Etchmiadzin, but Lynch found no trace of them.31

Such are the legends of Gregory and of Tiridates’ conversion to Christianity. In all justice, the highly imaginative material which was probably the work of an enthusiast, and in all certainty a surreptitious insertion in the work of the historian, should be distinguished from the less fanciful material concerning the imprisonment of Gregory and the martyrdom of the virgins, which though legendary, may probably be connected with the events of history.

Although Dubois de Montpèreux recognizes that all traditions point to the conversion of Armenia as having taken place before the conversion of Constantine (in 312), he does not consider this as probable, for Tiridates, as a tributary king, and imitator of the Romans in all things, could not have had the courage to take so important a step except in following out the policy of the emperor.32 Gregory, according to the view of Dubois, remained in his prison well until Constantine accepted Christianity, when the Armenian king called for him and was converted as a matter of diplomacy after listening to his exhortations.

But this is not accepted by modern writers, any more than it was by the ancient historians. Bryce places the conversion at 302, and states that the so-called conversion of Constantine happened either twelve or thirty-seven years later, according as one reckons to the battle of the Milvian Bridge, or his baptism.33 Armenia, therefore, was the first country that adopted Christianity as a religion of state, a matter of no small pride to the Gregorians, and it has been maintained as the national religion ever since in a form so intact as to surpass the dreams of the most ultra-conservative. And this, too, in the face of attacks by Persian fire-worshippers who attempted to force their religion upon the people, Greek and Latin popes, Mohammedan khalifs, and Turkish sultans. Ormanian, former Armenian patriarch at Constantinople, who gives the date as 301, considers the existence of the churches of St. Rhipsime and St. Gaiane with their inscriptions as positive proof, and mentions also the testimony in the writings of Eusebius, who cites the war of the year 311 which the Emperor Maximianus, the Dacian, declared against Armenians on account of their, at that time, recent conversion.34 The critical studies made since the journey of Dubois (1837) are conclusive at least in this, that the conversion of Tiridates and of the nation could not have taken place later [34]than the year 302, and there is no doubt therefore of the claim that the Gregorian church is the oldest national Christian church of the world.

The conversion of the people followed close upon the conversion of the king, for Gregory was a temple-building priest not without ambition, and the king was an acknowledged hero. The business of converting the nation was not a matter of priests and preaching as suggested by Dubois;35 as indicated before, it was rather a matter of fire and sword. Ormanian supposes that it was due to the work of the Christian communities already established, whose work was stimulated and encouraged by the king’s conversion.36 “Indeed,” he says, “the almost instant conversion of the whole of Armenia at the beginning of the fourth century, can not be explained but by the preëxistence of a Christian element which had taken root in the country.” And again, “The first nucleus of the faithful, by its steadfast energy, at length succeeded in gaining the mastery over both obstacles and persecutions.” This does not seem to me to be correct, for in the first place the Christianity of the first, second, and third centuries was not the Christianity of Gregory; it was one of the many forms of worship killed by Gregory; and in the second place there are sufficient records to prove the wholesale destruction of pagan temples, images, idols, and inscriptions as carried out by the king and saint, and of the use of the sword in forcing the people to change their faith.37

First, then, what was the Christianity of the first centuries? It is clear that the ideal was one of communal simplicity of life. That it was opposed to all hierarchies and established priesthoods there can be no question. The irksome round of daily toil was idealized in the fellowship of a common faith, the central point of which was the indwelling of the Spirit of God. Hence baptism was the all-important event, for through baptism the Holy Spirit descended into the human heart even as into Christ when he was baptized by John in the Jordan. Jesus was no God come to earth in human form by a miraculous conception; he was the son of Joseph and Mary. Feeling his kinship with God he was baptized, which ceremony was merely symbolic of the Indwelling Spirit. These early Christians have been called adoptionists, for the ceremony of baptism is said to represent the adoption of the individual by God, or by the Holy Spirit, both expressions having been used synonymously. Simple and pure, it seems that the adoptionists came as near carrying out the [35]spirit of the teachings of Jesus as any Christian sect that ever existed.38 But how utterly opposed, how perfectly contradictory to the brick and mortar religion of Gregory! That the adoptionists were objects of persecution by the orthodox church is a certainty, and it was very probably this sect that was referred to in “that stubborn heresy of their native land” mentioned so frequently by Armenian writers. The following picture was clearly set forth in a disputation between two Armenian church-men occurring at the close of the third century. “Tell me,” says Archelaus, “over whom it was that the Holy Spirit descended like a dove? Who is this one whom John baptized? If he was already perfect, if he was already the Son, if he was already Virtue, the Holy Spirit could not have entered into him. A kingdom can not enter into a kingdom.”39 What is also to the point is the celebrated formula of Nice (325) at which the nature of Christ was defined as essentially and continuously divine. “Christ a very God, begotten of God, but not a creature of God; Son of God, of one nature with God; who came down from heaven and took flesh, and became man, and suffered and ascended unto heaven; who was before he was begotten, and who has always been.” The decision was in absolute contradiction to the adoptionist faith, and it was legislated by this august council, that the members of such faith, who were called Paulicians, after their leader Paul of Samosata, should be rebaptized before admission to the church.40 The recalcitrants were driven to the mountains, where they increased in number as in strength until the persecution of the ninth century. Both Agathangelus and Faustus of Byzantium were silent concerning these people, and, one suspects, advisedly so.

Such was pre-Gregorian Christianity. How ridiculous to suppose that the conversion of the nation was due to the firm roots already established by the Christians when the Christians themselves had to be converted!

On the contrary, it was the right of might that established the new religion. The troops of the capital city were led by the king and priest in such an image- and temple-smashing campaign as was never before seen. Proceeding down the Araxes valley, the temple of the god Dir was levelled to the ground; the temple of Anahit was stoutly defended but to no avail; the temple was burned. One after another of the most famous sanctuaries were destroyed; temples of Aramazd, of Mithra, of [36]Nane, and of Anahit, many of which were defended by the vanquished until overpowered.41 Shrines of Vahakn and of Astghik were laid to waste to be replaced by Christian churches which grew up over the ruins as if overnight; and if a temple was destroyed, it was only to build a Christian church in its stead. So construction followed in the wake of destruction, the old was supplanted by the new, and when all armed resistance was beaten down, the king and priest continued the work by preaching.

When the work was fairly under way the ambitious priest journeyed to Cesarea in Cappadocia where he got himself ordained. This Gregory was no meek-spirited adoptionist. He was the son of Anak, of royal blood, ambitious, zealous, suffering and doing all things to gain his ends.

In view, therefore, of the actual character of preëxisting Christianity, and of the methods employed in converting the people, how can one reasonably suppose that the “instant conversion of the whole of Armenia to Christianity can not be explained but by the preëxistence of a Christian element which had taken root in the country”?

The state-authorized religion, however, did take root in the country, and became inextricably interwoven with the self-consciousness of the nation. It became the organ of national expression, and for many centuries has been the very backbone of the people. If the molten metals of national life had hardened during the reign of the Arsacidae kings they were at the time of the conversion in a molten state, ready to be remolded. This did not require much time. Old festivals were carried over intact, except that they were given a new meaning. The old national traditions, legends, and folk-lore were in the common possession of the people, and there was no reason for discouraging them. In fact the Armenian church even more than the state encouraged them, for it recognized in them a source of solidarity and national unity, as essential to the life of the church as its hierarchies, liturgy, and calendar of saints. So much then was old; part of the past carried over into the present to be carried over into the future. What then was new? First the legends and traditions, already mentioned, imbedded in the immediately past events of the new order. Legends of Abgar, of Gregory, of Thaddeus, of Rhipsime, of Tiridates, passed like magic fire from person to person, creating a common sentiment which made the foundations of the new church absolutely secure. How firmly this foundation was established is indicated by the reaction of the church to the decisions at the Council of Chalcedon, where the dogma of the dual nature of Christ was affirmed, in perfect contradiction to the Nicæan dogma, and by the reaction against the Persian proposals to accept fire-worship as the state religion. [37]

I shall consider the second point first. As already stated, the year 428 marked the end of the Armenian Arsacid dynasty. The nation was divided between Persia and Rome at this time, largely as a result of internal dissensions. In the year 450 the Persian king sent a letter to the Armenian princes, setting forth the excellence of fire-worship and the foolishness of Christianity, and summoned the Armenians to accept the Persian religion.42 A council of bishops and laymen was held and a reply of unanimous refusal was drawn up. “From this faith no one can move us, neither angels nor men, neither sword nor fire, nor water, nor any deadly punishment.”43 A rather impertinent reply from a subject nation to one which dominated it; but thoroughly characteristic of the Armenians. The Persians did use fire and sword, and defeated the Armenians in the plain of Avarair under Mount Ararat (451). But they did not gain their end. An old historian wrote of the battle, “swords of slayers grew dull, but their necks were not weary,” and the Persian high priest having seen the utter hopelessness of his project wrote, “these people have put on Christianity, not like a garment, but like flesh and blood.”44

Already, only one hundred fifty years after the conversion, the foundation of the church was secure. This of course was made possible by the completeness of the work of its founders; but this in itself would not have been sufficient. A common favorable sentiment had been created, which grew up under the natural conditions of life, and inasmuch as the legends described are part of the common beliefs of the people, it may be inferred that they played an important rôle in the formation of this sentiment. The church, on the other hand, has incorporated these legendary beliefs in its ritual and ceremony, and in that way has given them the necessary sanction by which they are passed on from generation to generation. They thus form part of the permanent social tradition of the Armenian people.

The security of the church at this early time (450) was indicated not only by the reaction of the nation to the Persian proposals of fire-worship, but also by the reaction to the decision of the Council of Chalcedon, at which, as stated, the dual nature of Christ was dogmatically affirmed, in contradiction to the dogma established at the Council of Nicæa (325), [38]accepted by the Armenian church. But at the time of the Chalcedonian council, the Persian difficulties were taking place, the battle of Avarair having occurred during the same year, and it was not until 491 that the Armenians held a synod of their own which assembled at Vagharshapat, in order to take decisive action.45 The decisions of the Council of Chalcedon were rejected and the action was repeated at subsequent synods. Of the three sees or patriarchates, the Roman at Rome, the Greek at Alexandria, and the Byzantine at Constantinople, the latter was gaining in power, and it was at the Council of Chalcedon that the precedence of the see of Constantinople was recognized. Naturally, neither the Roman nor Greek sees acknowledged the decision of the council, but later both Greek and Latin churches revoked their opposition, and recognized it as the fourth Œcumenic Council. But the Armenian church would have nothing to do with Chalcedon, in spite of Greek and Latin approval, and since that time she has stood alone, absolutely independent of Greek and Latin churches. Ormanian states: “She set herself to resist every new dogmatic utterance said to emanate from revelation, as well as any innovation which could in any way pervert the primitive faith.”46 The “primitive faith” may be a slight stretch of point, but the fact that the Armenian church adopted an absolutely independent policy, which separated her from all other Christian churches, and to which she has steadfastly adhered in spite of persistent Greek and Latin influence and efforts at domination, is in clear support of my assertion that the social foundations of the church were firmly and securely established as early as 450, only one hundred fifty years after the work of Gregory and Tiridates. [39]

There is a third and last body of Armenian legends more closely related to the second group discussed than to the first, and yet marked off in some respects from the second as well. They have a distinct religious stamp like those we have just finished describing, and they are all related in some way to the stories of the Old Testament. The legend of Haic is related to the Old Testament, for Haic was the great-grandson of Noah, but it clearly belongs to the first group taken up, for the reason that it has to do with the origin of the Armenian nation. The first body, including Haic, and the legends of Semiramis and Ara, Vahakn, Artasches and Satenik, and Artavazd, are all concerned with ancient Armenian kings, real or mythical, and all go back to a time before the introduction of Christianity. Vahakn was deified, but that does not exclude him since he was first a king. The second group, including the legends of Abgar, Rhipsime and Gaiane, Gregory, Thaddeus, and Tiridates, are all concerned with historical figures, real or supposed, and there is no doubt about their historic reality, with the exception of Rhipsime and Gaiane. But what marks them off from the other groups is that they are all concerned with the introduction of Christianity into the country. Those of the third group have no historic value whatever. They are legends based upon legends that date back to a period even more remote than the legend of Haic, and their social value does not approach that of the first two groups. They are all connected in some way, either with the Old Testament legend of Noah, or with the legend of the origin of man. No traveler ever passed through Armenia without hearing of one or more of them.

“In the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat.”1 Every Armenian, and others, too, believe that this is the Ararat of Armenia, or Masis as it is called, and it is true that there is absolutely nothing to disprove such a belief. James Bryce has given a careful consideration to the question, and states in conclusion that full liberty is left to the traveler to consider the “snowy sovereign of the Araxes plain” to be the true Ararat.2 There are several points that may be noted. First, there is nothing in the statement of Genesis to show that the Ararat mentioned was a mountain called by that [40]name; it seems rather that Ararat was a section of country, for the passage states that the ark rested “upon the mountains of Ararat.” In the second place, the mountain is not called Ararat by Armenians, but Masis. And thirdly, there is no independent Armenian tradition of the flood so far as is known, for it can not be shown that the modern tradition is older than the Christian era.

These facts would be conclusive evidence that Armenian Ararat is not the traditional Ararat of the Old Testament, were it not, first, for the fact that there was in the region of the mountain a province of Airarat which in all probability corresponds to the biblical Ararat. Secondly, the biblical Ararat unquestionably corresponds to the Assyrian Urarthu which is the section of country about Lake Van and Mount Ararat. So that, although not absolutely conclusive, the Armenian tradition enjoys a very high degree of probability.

In this connection the legend of the village of Nakhitchevan is worth noting. It is situated just to the north of the mountain on the left bank of the Araxes. Armenians believe it to be the place where Noah first landed, and as proof, the name of the village, which means, “the first place of landing,” is cited. One might suppose the name to have been given by the Christians after the conversion to Christianity, were it not that Ptolemy places in the same spot a city named Naxuana which is the exact Greek for the Armenian name. Also Josephus, fifty years before Ptolemy speaks of the place, as quoted by St. Martin: “Les Arméniens appellent ce lieu l’endroit de la descente parce que c’est là que l’arche trouva un endroit de salut, et qu’encore actuellement les indigènes montrent ses débris.”3 Tavernier who traveled through the country along about 1700 speaks of Nakhitchevan as the “oldest city of the world” and gives the tradition.4 But many Jews, who undoubtedly gave the village its name, lived in Armenia, long before the Christian era.

Situated on a broad plain four or five thousand feet above sea level, Ararat rises majestic and solitary to a height of 17,000 feet. There are no lesser peaks or ranges to destroy the grandeur of the effect. Except for its companion, Little Ararat, which rises beside it on a common base to a height of 12,840 feet, it stands alone as monarch of the broad plain it surveys. Little Ararat is in the form of a perfect cone, whereas Ararat is broad-shouldered and dome-shaped, supported by huge buttresses and capped with snow a considerable distance down the slope through the entire year. It is truly symbolic of strength and majesty.

Such is the mountain about which a thousand legends cluster. Marco Polo says of the mountain: “There is an exceeding great mountain on which [41]it is said the ark of Noah rested, and for this cause it is called the mountain of the Ark of Noah.” In 1254, a little before Marco Polo’s time, a Franciscan friar, William of Rubruck passed by the mountain upon which the ark is said to have rested, which mountain, he said, could not be ascended, though the earnest prayers of a pious monk prevailed so far that a piece of the wood of the ark was brought to him by an angel, which piece, he said, is still preserved in a church near by as a holy relic. He gives Masis as the name of the mountain and adds that it is the Mother of the World. According to a Persian tradition it is called “Cradle of the Human Race.” Still more interesting is the account by Sir John Maundeville, part of which runs as follows: “Fro Artyroun go men to an Hille, that is clept Sabisocolle. And there besyde is another Hille, that men clepen Ararathe: but the Jews clepen it Taneez, where Noas Schipp rested: and zit is upon that Montayne and men may see it a ferr in clear wedre: and that Montayne is well a myle high. And sum men seyn that they have seen and touched the Schipp; and put here Fyngres in the parties where the Feend went out when that Noe seyd ‘Benedicta.’ But they that seyn such Wordes seyn here Willie, for a man may not gon up the Montayne for gret plenties of Snow that is alle weys on that Montayne nouther Somer ne Winter: so that no man may gon up there: ne never man did, sithe the time of Noe: Saf a Monk that be the grace of God brought one of the Plankes down, that zit is in the Mynstre at the foot of the Montayne. And beside is the Cytes of Dayne that Noe founded. And faste by it is the Cytee of Any, in which were 1000 churches. But upon that Montayne to gon up this monk had gret desir; and so upon a day he went up and when he was the third part of the Montayne he was so wery that he mighte not furthere, and so he rested him and felle to slep, and when he awoke he fonde himself liggyie at the foot of the Montayne. And then he preyde devoutly to God that he wold vouch saf to suffre him gon up. And an angelle cam to him and seyde that he scholde gon up; and so he did. And sithe that Time never non. Wherefore men scholde not beleeve such Woordes.”5

The legend of the monk is usually given in a form which confirms still more the sacredness of the mountain. St. Jacob, as the monk was named, tried three successive times to climb the mountain. Each time he fell asleep intending to resume his journey the next morning, only to wake up finding himself at the same point he had started from the preceding day. An angel came to him after the third time, and told him that God had forbidden mortal foot ever to tread on the sacred summit, but that he should be given a fragment of the ark in which mankind had been preserved as a reward for his devout perseverance.6 This treasure is still [42]preserved at Etchmiadzin and the saint is commemorated by the little monastery of St. Jacob, which till 1840, when a tremendous shaking of the mountain showered the little monastery with rocks of destruction, stood above the valley of Arghuri on the slopes of Ararat.

The little village of Arghuri, the single village on the mountainside, was the city of Noah’s vineyard, and contained a little church which is said to hallow the spot where Noah first set up an altar.7 But this village, too, was completely destroyed by the avalanche of 1840. Not the slightest trace of it remains, though only three years before its destruction, Dubois de Montpèreux visited the little city and described it together with the church of Noah, Noah’s vineyard, and the monastery of St. Jacob.8 In the garden of the city were planted pear trees, apple, plum, cherry, apricot, peach, and nut trees. This very garden was the site of the first vine on which the old patriarch became drunk, and the inhabitants showed Dubois some bits of creepers to prove it. “Dieu,” they said, “pour punir les ceps qui avaient ainsi entrainé le pauvre patriarche dans le péché, les condamna a ne plus porter de raisins.” Naïve, yes, but very sweetly so. And the church, the people said, marked the place where Noah offered his first sacrifice after the deluge. Except for the garden of Arghuri, wrote Dubois, this great mountain was absolutely destitute of verdure; an old stunted willow, wound about with snow and ice was the only other exception to this. According to the legend, it marked the spot where a board of Noah’s ark had taken root and sprung up into a living tree which the people venerated. One was not permitted to take away even the smallest of its feeble branches.

All of this was blotted out so completely by the shower of falling rocks and boulders that it is hard to imagine the places as ever having existed. The primeval willow, the vineyard, the sacred church, and the little monastery of St. Jacob have left not the slightest trace. The bell of the old church is no more heard; the Christian service is not chanted any longer on the sacred mountain of the Ark.

Of the numerous other legends associated with the mountain I shall mention only two. One of them regards the summit of the mountain as the site of Chaldean star-worship, and asserts that a pillar with a figure of a star stood upon it.9 According to the same legend, twelve wise men stood beside the pillar to watch for the star of the East, which three of them followed to Bethlehem. The other is in respect to the spring situated above the spot where stood the monastery. A bird, called by the Armenians tetagush, feeds on the locusts which are such a plague to [43]the country, and curiously enough, the bird is attracted by the waters of the spring. When the locusts appear, the people carry their bottles to the spring and filling them with the peculiarly charmed water, take them back to their fields where they are placed on the ground to attract the tetagush. The people of Syria and Palestine were much in need of tetagush and Ararat spring water during the spring and summer of 1915, for the swarms of locusts not only devoured the crops but also the leaves and barks of the trees.

On the bank of the Araxes, in the plain of Armenia, and in full view of Ararat are located the monastery of Khor-Virap and the chapel of St. Gregory close beside it. An Armenian inscription is cut in the walls of the portico of the monastery which marks the spot where a monk, Johannes by name, appeared twice after his death saying that he had seen Gregory the Illuminator. The chapel of St. Gregory covers the traditional well into which he was thrown and imprisoned for thirteen years by King Tiridates. Dubois descended into a sort of tunnel, fifteen or sixteen feet below the pavement of the chapel, which is part of an old fortress, and was shown the worn stones of a niche where the saint prayed, as evidence of the thirteen years, quite as though other pilgrims who knelt in the same place could not have assisted somewhat the pious work of the saint.10 The spot is only a few steps from the famous temple dedicated to the principal god of the Armenians, Aramazd, and it seems clear that the pagan king intended to make a sacrifice to his gods in casting the young fanatic into the well. The temple was called Achelichad, meaning “many sacrifices” because of the many offerings here given up to Aramazd. With the era of Christianity, the name Achelichad gave way to the name Khor Virap, meaning dry well. Gregorius Magistros, already mentioned, brought the body of the saint from Constantinople and placed it in the bottom of the well, where it served to cure sick pilgrims.

There is a tradition that the Armenian city of Erzerum, not far from the source of the Euphrates, marks the vicinity of the Garden of Eden. The Persian king Khosref Purveez is said to have encamped in the neighborhood and to have received a message from the prophet Mohammed during his sojourn, in which he was offered the protection of Islam if he would embrace the faith. But the king spurned the proposal and tossed the letter into the Euphrates. Nature, horrified at the sacrilege, dried up the flowers and fruits of the ancient garden and even parched up the sources of the river itself. And so the last relic of Eden became waste.11 [44]

In the same connection, there is a plaintive Armenian elegy, composed in the person of Adam, who, sitting at the gate of paradise and beholding cherubim and seraphim enter the garden, makes the following defence: he did not eat the forbidden fruit until after he had witnessed its fatal effects upon Eve, when, seeing her despoiled of all her glory, he was touched with pity and tasted the immortal fruit in the hope that the Creator, contemplating both in the same plight might with paternal love take compassion on them. But in vain. “The Lord cursed the serpent and Eve,” pathetically cries Adam, “and I was enslaved between them.” The elegy closes most touchingly,—“When ye enter Eden, shut not the gate of paradise, but place me standing at the gate. I will look in a moment and then bring me back. Ah! I remember ye, O flowers and sweet smelling fountains. Ah! I remember ye, O birds, sweet singing, And ye, O beasts.”12 [45]

Vartavar, meaning “flaming of the rose,” was celebrated in pagan times in honor of Anahit, goddess of chastity, at midsummer. The central act of the festival was the offering of a dove and a rose to her golden image. With the introduction of Christianity the temple and the image were destroyed, and it may be noted that upon the site of the Temple of Anahit in Vagharshapat was built the Cathedral of Etchmiadzin. This would lead to the strange conclusion that in the vision of St. Gregory, Jesus Christ descended upon a pagan temple. The fact seems to be that this marvelous vision was seen by a pious monk who published a life of St. Gregory some two or three centuries after the Illuminator’s death.1 But the festival became the “Festival of the Transfiguration of Christ,” although the name Vartavar still remains, and doves are still set flying.2

The festival is celebrated differently in various places. Upon the mountains of Armenia every family brings a sheep for sacrifice, adorned with colored papers and pigments, and as the sheep approach the shrine, lighted candles are fixed upon their horns.3 Sheaves of grain, fruit, flowers, and doves are also brought as sacrifices, while dust from beside the altar is carried home to children as a talisman to help them to learn their A B C’s. In the absence of a church on the mountainside, which is usually the case, a large white tent with crosses is put up beside some sacred spring, with which the country abounds. The spring is necessary, for on this day the people amuse themselves by throwing water upon each other. For this reason the day is often called Armenian Water Day. After the doves are set flying, the priest sprinkles the people, and they in turn sprinkle water over each other. This practice probably dates to the legend of the deluge, the Universal Baptism with which God cleansed His sinful earth. The dove and the baptism are also suggestive of the baptism of Jesus by John in the waters of Jordan. This part of the festival is probably an addition to the pagan rite, for the sprinkling of the water is symbolic of love and forgiveness; it is carried on with much laughing and merry-making. The festival includes also a kind of fair, for the people have to show what progress they have made during the year in art and the various handicrafts. Races, competitions, and games are held, and the victors are crowned with wreaths of roses, so that even the rose continues to have [57]an important place in the festivities as it had in pagan days. The sprinkling of water, the games, the races, show how happy a time the people must have on this day; the exhibition of the year’s accomplishment in handicraft and art points out the more serious side; while the essential religious symbolism is very clearly emphasized. What may also be noted is that there is entertainment for all, old and young, serious and frivolous. The pious-minded may sit on the mountainside contemplating the religious aspect of it all; the gay and light-hearted may sprinkle water over each other; the young and strong may run races and play games; men and women of a practical turn of mind may visit the fair and note the progress made during the year; and children may roll about on the mountainsides or gather roses, for these are in full bloom at this time.

The pagan spring festival in honor of Mihr, the god of fire, was taken over by the church to commemorate the bringing of the Babe Jesus to the temple, where Mary sacrificed two doves according to the custom of purification.4 The ancient rite consisted of kindling fires in the open market places in honor of the god Mihr, and of lighting a lantern from one of the newly kindled fires, which was kept burning in the temple throughout the year. As now celebrated, on February 26, every young man who has been married within the year brings a load of aromatic shrubs, making a huge pile of them in the yard of the church. A religious service is held in the open air at evening-time, after which the priest sets fire to the pile. All the villagers, men, women, and children, dance about the fire, while boys and young men show their agility and courage by leaping over it. When the flames die down, each person carries home a glowing brand and places it on the hearthstone for good luck.

The description of the festival by Abeghian shows how a general celebration of this kind varies in particulars from place to place.5 On the afternoon of the 13th of February,6 which is the day before the church festival of the purification, a pile of wood consisting usually of thorn-wood, cane, and straw is gathered together in the churchyard. The entire community comes together in the church on the night of the same day, each person provided with a candle. After the vespers all stand about the pile of shrub and wood, the newly married during the year making the first row. The candles are lighted from the church light, and after the priest has blessed the pile, it is set ablaze from all sides, after which the candles are put out. As soon as the fire has died down, the candles are relighted from the glowing embers which are regarded as sacred, and carried home [58]where they are used to light a pile of shrub and wood that has been gathered on the roof of the house. The young people jump over the fire while the young women and married women march around it saying, “May it not itch me, and may I not receive any scabs,” taking care just to singe the border of their dresses. The ashes, as well as the half-burned wood-stuffs are preserved, or scattered in the four corners of the barn, over the fields or in the garden, for the ashes and flames of the firebrands are believed to protect people and cattle from sickness and the fruit trees from worms and caterpillars. In the homes of the newly married the festival is celebrated with music and dance, the young couples especially making it a point to dance about the sacred flames, while in some places special food is prepared in honor of the occasion.

Various prophesies are made during the festival, for example, if the flame and smoke blows to the east, it is a sign of a good harvest for the coming year, if toward the west, a bad growth is expected.

In recent years the religious authorities at Etchmiadzin printed the following prohibition in the church calendar: “It is forbidden to run about the fire.” But the festival is celebrated nevertheless.7 That it originates in the pagan festival held in honor of Mihr there is little doubt, for the month of February corresponds to the ancient Armenian month Mehakan, which, translated into modern Armenian, Mihragan, means belonging to Mihr, or more loosely, the Festival of Mihr.

The festival in commemoration of the dead is celebrated on the first day after Easter, and may be regarded as a reaction against the lenten fasts. Families of Armenians, loaded with picnic baskets, packages of food, and bottles of wine, flock to their cemeteries in great numbers. Priests are paid small fees for standing over the graves of the dead to chant prayers for the salvation of the departed souls. Over the graves of the recently dead stand the bereaved relatives of the deceased, lamenting loudly and bewailing a fate which they know must some day be their own. A more maudlin spectacle could not be imagined. Here and there are seated groups of families eating and drinking and laughing all the more heartily for the enforced abstinence of the preceding weeks; while standing beside this grave or that is a priest in black robe and high hat, chanting a prayer for the dead, and incidentally earning his daily bread. Eating seems to be the chief amusement; even the mourners eat after they have faithfully mourned, and the priests too come in for their shares after all possible fees have been earned. Altogether it is a post-lenten festival in the full meaning of the term, and much in contrast to the wholesome enjoyment and the [59]light-hearted gaiety so characteristic of Vartavar. It has been witnessed in Constantinople by Armenians I know, who have given accounts to me. Whether or not it is carried out in this manner in the villages and rural districts I am not aware, but I should be very much surprised to learn that it was, for I should certainly regard the festival in this form as a product of the artificiality of city life. In the absence of wholesome amusements and of the community solidarity characteristic of the Armenian village, contact with city-bred folk would inevitably result in a shift of standards of judgment and valuation, together with a break-up in old habits of thought and life; and as the people have no common play-ground, so to speak, except the poor denuded cemetery allotted them by the Turkish government, one can well excuse the ugliness of the spectacle. The Armenian has Vartavar, a real festival, and need not look with shame upon this festival in commemoration of the dead.

This same offering of sacrifice for the dead is carried on in a variety of ways. In Armenian villages the family of the deceased prepares a lamb or a kid with rice, and on the day of the funeral pieces of it are given to the attendants; given, as they say, and taken, in sacrifice for the dead. The practice in Constantinople is somewhat different, although the idea is exactly the same. Forty days after the death of an individual, or perhaps on the anniversary of the death, the bereaved family prepares a lamb or a kid with rice, which is distributed to the people in small pots, and given, as they say, in sacrifice for the dead. The Greek custom in this respect is most absurd. At the head of the casket, which is left open, two men march in the funeral procession carrying a wide tray filled with boiled wheat and sugar, and trailing a piece of black crape. After the burial this is distributed to the mourners in handfuls, again in sacrifice for the dead. Libations set aside and poured out in Roman days are illustrative of the same thing. That these practices are not Christian but distinct survivals of pagan festivals and customs is very clear.

The above conclusions, namely, first that the festival as I described it is an aberration of city life, and second, that although identified with the church it is distinctly pagan in character, are borne out by Abeghian, whose material, as an Armenian who for many years lived in the little Armenian village of Astapat, is distinctly first-hand.8 Worship of the deceased, he says, begins immediately after death. Each departed soul, and especially those of elderly people, requires particular honor on the first day after death, and during the ensuing year. It is for this reason a great misfortune for an Armenian peasant not to have a child. A still greater misfortune, however, it is to die in a strange land where there are none to care for the departed soul. That a curious evolution has taken place [60]in these requirements is very clear. In the beginning, satisfactions of a material kind were required, something to eat and to drink, and accordingly the custom arose of placing bread upon the heart of the dead, or sanctified bread in the cavity of the mouth and incense in the nostrils. Then there arose the idea of facilitating the journey of the departed into the beyond, and of making the future life of the soul a happier one. For example, Armenians generally bathe the bodies of their dead in blessed water, and wash the clothes of the deceased on the day following burial for the purification of the soul so that it may arrive spotless at its destination. Since the soul has been cleansed of all sin through the symbolic washing of the body and clothes, no more covering is required for the body than a large white cloth. No other color is permissible. Should the deceased be more than ten years of age, candles or oil lamps are burned during eight days over the spot where the body was bathed in order to lighten the way of the soul into the beyond. According to old beliefs, the destination of the departed soul is a place of darkness, and hence two candles are placed in the hands of the dead immediately after the bath in order that he may recognize his friends and relatives in the world beyond. At frequent intervals during the first year, food and drink are brought to the cemetery, and placed upon the grave. There is weeping, eating, and drinking at these times, and what food is left over is always placed over the grave.

The souls of the righteous are thought of as luminous, the wicked as black. Accordingly the blessed are called “spirits of light.”9 In order to possess a bright soul one must have performed good works, of which giving alms to the poor is considered the most important. Such spirits are also called “generous,” “charitable.” It is a current belief that the blackened souls become brighter through the good works of descendants, as well as through their prayers. Offspring are thus especially desirable, and the old Armenian liturgy, the Maschtotz prepared by St. Mesrob, the inventor of the Armenian alphabet in the fifth century, contains innumerable prayers for the dead.10 The prayers are short and their power is relative to the frequency of repetition rather than to the length. Some sort of short prayer is repeated with every thought of the dead, as for example, “May God have mercy upon his soul”; “May his soul become lightened”; or only “The illuminated soul.”

Several days of the year are set apart for particular remembrance of the dead.11 At these times the departed spirits are supposed to come down from heaven and to roam about the vicinity of their graves or in the homes of their relatives. On the eve of these days it is necessary to do honor to [61]their memory with incense and candles, which are regarded as offerings. The odor of the incense is especially pleasant to spirits, for the incense-tree also blooms in paradise.12 Saturday night is very commonly devoted to such intercession and worship. Incense is burned upon the hearth while prayers are repeated, or a flame is ignited upon a plate which is carried into all the corners of the house, or barn, or wherever it is believed the departed spirit may be wandering. In some places it is customary to maintain the “light of the dead” throughout the night in order that the spirits may enter the house. If they find the house dark in looking through the roof window, they make away, cursing. Water is not drunk in the dark during these nights, for it is believed that to do so would be to take it away from the thirsty spirits of the dead.

On the Day of the Dead the spirits are especially honored, for they love most to wander in the neighborhood of their graves. People actually feel themselves to be among the souls of the dead on this celebration day. The latter are very happy to be thought of, and are especially glad to have their graves blessed by the priests. But to please them most one must bring wood and incense and leave it to be burned over their graves. Three days the spirits remain upon the earth, after which they return to heaven, their visit having been duly honored. If they come to find themselves forgotten, they curse their relatives and fly away in despair. Occasionally they come down to be of service; especially is this true of the dead father and his living son, for the former is especially remembered, and his grave is regarded as holy. Armenians swear by the graves, or by the spirits of their fathers, and call upon them for help in time of especial need.13

Tavernier described the same festival in his Voyages and noticed that it was considered the greatest infamy to eat with a “Mordischou,” the person who washed the dead.14 No single festival and group of relevant beliefs is more instructive in showing how much of Armenian folk-belief and custom is the survival of paganism.

There is yet another festival of this group, which, however, is not to be traced to paganism, and it would be a mistake to suppose that the church is connected with it in the same way and to the same extent as it is with the first three festivals considered. The festival is called Vartan’s Day, and although the church sanctions the festival and sets apart a day for the celebration, it comes about as near being apart from the church as any single festival. Vartan was the general of the Armenian army defeated at the battle of Avarair, spoken of in Part One, by the Persian fire-worshippers who endeavored to impose their religion upon the Armenians at a time when part of Armenia was under the domination of [62]Persia, and the remainder tributary to Rome. But though defeated in battle, the moral victory, as people now use the term, was Armenian, for the battle proved the utter failure of the Persians to convert the Armenian people to their religion.15 Vartan saved the nation for Gregorian Christianity, and it is significant that the people look upon Vartan as saviour of the nation rather than as saviour of their religion, showing how the religion was and still is identified with the nation.

It is in his honor that the people hold a festival on the anniversary day of the battle of Avarair. School children sing songs and wreath Vartan’s picture with red flowers. The belief is that this peculiar kind of red flower sprang up from the blood of the Christian army. Recitations and national patriotic plays are given, and as the children participate in singing songs, reciting pieces, and rendering plays, the older people participate in attending them.16

Besides the belief of the red flower there are numerous other beliefs hallowed by the day. Nightingales that fly over the battlefield are supposed to sing “Vartan, Vartan,” and there is a species of antelope with a pouch of fragrant musk under its throat which is said to have acquired its fragrance by browsing on herbage wet with the blood of Armenian heroes.17

Altogether it is the kind of festival to give expression to the sentiment I have spoken of as love for the country, for its mountains, rivers, and valleys, and for its ideals of freedom, independence, and strength. In the presence of the state the festival probably would be utilized to foster and give expression to the sentiment of loyalty to the state. There would be specially chosen speakers to talk of patriotism, waving of banners, and carefully designed methods of instilling hatred for a real or supposed enemy, much as French school children have been taught to hate Englishmen. But in the absence of the state, the sentiment expressed must be a purer sentiment, loftier and freer, and one can not but regret that Vartan’s Day and similar festivals have been suppressed by the Turkish government. And yet, one could not reasonably expect otherwise.

Most charming and most picturesque of festivals is that participated in by the romantic Armenian maidens on the early dawn of Ascension Day.18 On the eve of the same day the young girls who wish their fortunes told, decorate a large bowl with specially selected flowers, after which each girl casts a token, a ring, a brooch, a thimble, into the bowl. Flowers of several kinds are then put in, and the bowl is filled with water [63]drawn from seven springs. Then they cover it with an embroidered cloth and take it by night to the priest who says a prayer over it. The most carefully and daintily prepared bowl is then placed out in the moonlight, open to the stars where it is left until dawn. At early daybreak of the next morning, the maidens, furnished with provisions for the entire day, go out of the village carrying their bowl to the side of a spring, the foot of a mountain, or into an open field, gathering on the way various kinds of flowers with which they deck themselves. Having arrived at their place of festival, they play games, dance, and sing, after which they take a beautiful little girl, too young to tell where the sun rises, who has been previously chosen and gaily dressed for the occasion, to draw the various articles out of the bowl. The face of the child is covered with a richly wrought veil that she may not see what is in the bowl, and she then proceeds to withdraw the articles which she holds in her hand one at a time. While this is done some 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, most of which have been written especially for the festival, of which I shall give but a few.

[64]

Thus each one carries its bit of prophesy, daintily and prettily expressed, which when sung at the foot of some mountain, in the bright eastern sunlight of the morning, while a little child is holding tokens beside a bowl surrounded by the group of beflowered maidens, makes as complete and charming a picture as one could well imagine.

Many curious beliefs, superstitions, customs, and legends are directly related to Ascension Day. It is believed, for example, that on the eve of this day the water of the springs, brooks, and rivers lies peacefully motionless for a single moment during the night. At the same moment heaven and earth, mountain and stone, trees and flowers beckon and congratulate one another. First heaven congratulates and kisses the earth, then one star beckons to another, one flower to another, and so forth until all of nature’s objects have expressed their mutual good feeling. Even plants and “soulless” objects receive the gift of speech and share their secrets one with the other at this time. He who hides himself in a stone crevice of the mountainside may listen to the conversation of stones and flowers, and understand what they tell each other. They tell on this night what sort of sicknesses they and the springs will heal, and many people endeavor to attend at this moment, but only a few succeed.20

At midnight the waters are believed to have the power of healing, and people bathe themselves in the streams. As the children are not to be troubled during the night, water is warmed for them the next morning, bits of grass are thrown in and the children are bathed. During the magic moment the door of the cavern of “Maher,” the revered hero god who dwells upon earth, is opened: and one may enter to see him, his steed, and the “wheel of the starred heavens” or the wheel of fate. In one of the national epics (David of Sassun) Maher is represented as the strongest of the heroes, and is supposed to dwell in a rocky cave in the vicinity of Van21 (probably the rock of Van). In this cave all of the world’s riches are heaped up, and the “wheel of the world,” the wheel of fate which constantly turns assigning to people their destinies, stands there. Maher looks continually at the wheel and if it should stand still, he comes out of his cavern to ravage the world. The door of the cave is made of stone and covered with cuneiform inscriptions. It is locked during the entire year except for the night of the ascension of Christ, when it is opened during the single magic moment. Whosoever perceives this moment may step into the cave and take as much gold as he pleases. The idea of the “wheel of fortune” is considerably extant, although it is not always understood as separated from heaven and connected with Maher.22 That [65]the idea of fate or of fortune is generally associated with the day, not only by romantic maidens, but by the people, is very evident.

The flowing waters are believed to change into gold during the silent minute, and if one places an object in the water and wishes at the same time that it become gold, the object turns to gold. Accordingly the young men and women go to the springs and rivers in order to draw water, trusting their fates that they may select the happy moment. Superstitions and magic are not lacking, for while one member of a party seats himself upon a pair of fire-tongs in the fashion of a rider, another performs likewise upon a long-handled spit. The iron tools are also regarded as a necessary protection against the calls that one hears behind after the water has been drawn, for if one should look back perchance, he would surely fall under the influence of the evil spirits. The oldest of the party carries a gourd flask full of wheat and barley, which is poured into the stream towards midnight with the words “I give you wheat and barley; you give me everything that is good.” Thereupon he fills the gourd flask with water, and the party hurries homeward to discover the gold.23

The fortune-telling festival is given by Abeghian as he observed it in his home village, and I shall give a free translation of his account at this point because of a few interesting variations. In Astapet, the festival is called the “Festival of the Mother of Flowers.” On the day before Ascension Day the girls and young women of the village divide themselves into two groups, one to gather special sorts of flowers from the mountainside, while the other goes to “steal” water from seven springs, or seven rivers. The “thieves” must not see each other, nor must the people of the village know aught of what is happening. Having filled their vessels with water, each throws a stone into the spring and then they turn back, taking care neither to look about, to set down their vessels, nor to talk. They imagine that the mountains, the valleys, trees, and meadows call out behind them and if they should turn about they would be turned to stone.24

At night of the same day the “water thieves” and flower gatherers meet together in a garden to prepare the “Havgir” or magic bowl in which is poured the water from the seven springs, and in which seven stones from the seven sources, together with leaves of the gathered flowers are dropped. Each one who wishes her fortune told now throws in a charm token, such as mentioned before. Those who are not present send their tokens in order to have them thrown into the “Havgir” by others. The bowl is then adorned with flowers, after which the “Vicak” meaning [66]destiny or fate, is prepared. This consists of two pieces of wood tied together in the form of a cross, which is dressed and adorned with jewels and pearls to make it appear as a newly-married doll-bride. The “Vicak” is fastened to the “Havgir,” and both are placed under the stars, in order that these who are the real destinies, may work the proper magic upon the charm tokens.25 A few girls guard it during the whole night against the young men who try to steal it.

Early the next morning the maidens gather together in the garden laden with food baskets and prepared to make a day of it. The “Havgir” and strangely fashioned “Vicak” are carried to a nearby spring, the young girls decking themselves with flowers as they go. The spring is decorated about with flowers, green leaves, and branches, and the “Havgir” is placed in the middle, and then after they have prepared everything and eaten, the oldest among them takes the “Vicak,” kisses it, gives it to another, who does likewise, and so it passes from hand to hand. Finally a seven-year-old girl receives it. She sets herself in the middle of the group and holds the “Vicak” while the “Havgir” stands before her. The little girl is called “bride,” is the interpreter of the “Vicak” and is specially selected and dressed for the occasion. When she has received the “Vicak” a red veil is passed over both, and all is ready for the central event of the festival. A charm song is sung by the group, and after each stanza the “bride” draws a token from the vessel. The preceding verse reveals the fate of the one to whom the token belongs.26

The fortune-telling festival of Ascension morning stands quite alone. Bodeful of the future and suggestive of the past, it can not but have a serious tenor, for there are maidens whose lovers have not been born, as there are also sadder ones. Perhaps they do not take their verses very seriously. Whether they do or not there is always the charm of sunrise colors, and the out-of-doors that makes it as beautiful as it is romantic. The best of the future, their brightest hope, the best of the present, warmth of sunshine and color, and the best of the past, their golden dreams of youth, are brought together on this day and given a common expression in a way that must charm them as it charms the observer. Festivals to be perfect festivals must be out-of-doors and the day must be bright. [67]

The third group of festivals comprises those connected with the common life of the people, including the ceremonies of baptism, betrothal, marriage, and funeral. The church is vitally related to each of them, and they are of importance here because of their social value, which I shall again endeavor to point out.

First after birth, the most important event in the life of every Armenian child is that of baptism, for the belief is that the unbaptized child has no soul. The infant is therefore generally baptized on the day after birth, and when this is impossible always within eight days of birth. If the child is sick there is all the more reason to hurry; in this case the essential parts of the ceremony are performed in the home, the remainder being celebrated at the church at some later time. The very first thing to be done therefore after the birth of a child is to make the necessary preparations for baptism, which are very elaborate in the case of the first-born, especially if the child is a boy.1 A girl is always better than no child at all, but not much better. A godfather and godmother are selected, presents are exchanged between them and the parents of the child, invitations are sent to friends and relations, and at a fixed time the assembled people form a procession to the church, led by the midwife holding the child. The godfather pays all expenses, and therefore such splendor as the ceremony may have in the way of special ornaments for the altar, numbers of priests, and a large choir, is determined by him. After the group has properly assembled at the church, the priest takes the child from the midwife and gives it to the godfather. The profession of faith follows immediately and then the priest turns to the west to abjure the devil and to the east to invoke the Trinity.2 Having placed the hem of his chasuble upon the babe, the priest proceeds to the sacristy reciting a psalm, and followed by the people. The central event now takes place. The baptism consists of three immersions in the name of the Holy Trinity. First water is poured over the head of the child, after which the whole body is plunged into the water. Confirmation is administered right after the ceremony of immersion, and takes place upon the altar of the church proper, before the image of the Blessed Virgin. The forehead, eyes, ears, [80]nose, mouth, hands, back, breast and upper part of the feet of the infant are anointed with holy oil, and two wax tapers are placed in the hands of the godfather while carrying the child. The priest then takes the tapers and the babe, consecrates and confirms him by three profound inclinations before the altar, gives candles and child back to the godfather and blesses both. Now the child may be called by its Christian name, which is usually that of a saint.3 Led by the priest and the singing choir, the procession now starts back to the home of the little one, still carried by the godfather who continues to hold the candles. When he reaches the door of the mother, she kneels and prostrates herself before him. He in turn delivers the child to the mother’s arms who may now kiss it for the first time, the child not having been kissed by any one from the moment of birth to the delivering over to the mother by the godfather after baptism. Others may now also kiss the babe, and each endeavors to be the first, for there is a superstitious value attached to the first kiss following the mother’s after baptism. The priests and the family of the godfather spend the evening in the child’s home. They are served constantly by the father who does not himself sit down. For forty days the mother must keep her room, and walk only in such parts of the house as are exposed to the sun.4 Having completed the fortieth day she and her babe are taken to church by the grandmother.5 On this occasion the young mother must bring an offering, which in times past was a rich Persian rug, but is now merely a package of tapers. She waits at the door of the sacristy until the priest comes and leads her in before the high altar where both mother and child receive a blessing. After this ceremony she must visit the godfather and kiss his hand in token of gratitude.

If a funeral passes during the first forty days of the child’s life, the little one must be snatched up from the cradle and be carried upright. People now come to offer their felicitations. The greeting of the guest is always, “May God raise the child in the shadow of its parents,” to which answer is given, “May God bless you according to your desire,” or “May your tongue be always in good health.”

It is the popular belief among Armenians that the practice of early marriages dates from the proclamation of a Persian shah of the sixteenth century, to whom part of Armenia was tributary.6 This edict was intended [81]to wipe out Christianity, and provided for the marriage of Armenian boys and girls with Persian children. In order to evade the edict, the Armenian parents ran secretly from house to house for several nights marrying off their children to each other. The custom on the part of the parents of arranging for the marriage of their children without the knowledge of the latter is supposed also to be rooted in this event. Whether the explanation be true or not, it certainly is not uncommon for children to marry at sixteen in the interior of Armenia, and it is still generally true that arrangements for the marriages of children are made without the knowledge of those most concerned.7 The girl does occasionally exercise choice, but when the unfortunate suitor is not desired by the parents the feeling of obligation on the girl’s part, simply because she has lived at her father’s table, is sufficient to induce her to submit.8 And the same may be said of the young man, although the greater independence of a son gives him a little more ground for acting contrary to his father’s wishes, than in the case of the daughter. But even when the choice of the children is accepted, the arrangements and ceremony of betrothal are always carried out by the parents.

These arrangements are something as follows. The parents of a young man consult his grandparents, and choose a young girl who to them seems eligible. They then inform a woman match-maker of their decision, and it is her business to sound the ground, so to speak, before a proposal is made, since a refusal would ruin the boy’s reputation. The matchmaker is often a professional woman, and can therefore be relied upon not to make a bungle of the job. Among other things, she finds out what gifts the bridegroom-to-be must make to his future bride, which can of course be done only after the proposal has met with a favorable response on the part of the parents of the girl. “What can he offer his bride,” is the all important question from the standpoint of the girl’s family. Among the rich, but in times past, gold bracelets bejeweled with diamonds or strings of gold pieces for adorning the head or neck were common varieties of gifts. To-day silver plate, or expensive heirlooms are given. After these matters have been decided upon, preparations are made for the ceremony of betrothal, usually held in the evening. The friends of the young man are notified to meet together in his house at an appointed hour with the priest who is given a ring which he blesses. The procession of the bridegroom’s friends headed by the priest now starts for the house of the bride. [82]All are provided with lighted wax candles which they hold in their hands as they proceed down the streets accompanied by the sound of violin, clarinets, drum, and joyful singing. Sometimes a detour is made in order to lengthen the procession.

Having arrived at their destination, the father and mother of the girl pretend to know nothing whatever of the reason for the coming of the guests, and conversation proceeds for a considerable time without the slightest allusion to the matter of chief moment. The priest finally makes the following statement amid profound silence: “According to the law of the supreme Creator, and following the usages of human society, we have the happiness of demanding the hand of Miss X, for Mr. Y.” The father of the girl pretends not to wish to accept, stating that she is too young, or that her mother is very desirous to keep her at home. But upon further pressing on the part of the parents of the boy, the acceptance is given. It is now the turn of the girl to be consulted; she, however, is nowhere to be found. The priest searches, and when finally discovered she does not speak a word. The former, however, knows, and offering his hand he says, “If you consent, kiss the hand,” which is straightway done, for the girl has been informed beforehand that the kiss is to be forthcoming. This part of the procedure takes place apart from the crowd, and is followed by the presentation of the ring and the benediction which must take place before the public. But since custom forbids the girl to appear during the entire evening, a brother or a sister comes forward and kneels before the priest to receive the ring. The rest all kneel at the same time, and the priest gives the benediction. The ring is carried by the child to the fiancée, the health of the couple is drunk in rose-syrup, and congratulations and compliments are exchanged. Whatever else is eaten or drunk, rose-syrup must be at hand, for this is essential and peculiar to the ceremony.

All this while the young man is within the walls of his own home. Custom forbids him to appear at the house of his bride-to-be until the wedding day, and if perchance the two should meet, he must turn his head away while she hides herself. Towards ten o’clock the party breaks up, and each guest is given a wax candle. All try to steal something from the house before leaving, such as a bottle, a glass, or a spoon, and if the thieves are not caught before they leave the house, the articles are returned only at the price of a supper from the head of the family. The party now returns to the home of the future bridegroom, accompanied by the friends and relatives of the girl. The procession formed, there is the same lighting of wax candles received from the host, brightening the otherwise darkened streets, and the same music and singing to triumph over the silence of the night. The young man must stand upright before his future father-in-law all through the visit. For him the great moment comes when the [83]brother of his fiancée takes him aside and offers him a glass of syrup prepared by her own hands. The whole night is passed in song and amusement. During the following fortnight both families receive visits of congratulation, and at every visit the host or hostess must offer the syrup drunk at the betrothal ceremony.

Elaborate and gay as are the festivities of betrothal, the celebrations of marriage are so much more so that one is inclined to look upon the essential religious ceremony as a pretext for the merry-making.9 The interval of a month which ordinarily intervenes between engagement and marriage is devoted to making the necessary preparations for the wedding. The bridegroom must get ready the promised ornaments, a white wedding-dress for his bride, a fine veil to cover her face, and a pair of shoes, a rather strange combination of gifts. One wonders also why the necessary gloves and silk stockings are not included. The young lady on her part prepares her trousseau including garments of various sorts, bits of jewelry, a wooden chest filled with her clothing, a mirror, a nuptial bed with the necessary accessories, and a few cooking utensils; altogether an outfit quite as varied and singular as the gifts of the bridegroom, but certainly practical and sensible enough. Two days before the wedding, which usually occurs on a Sunday afternoon, invitations are sent out to friends and relatives, and musicians are secured. On the eve of the ceremony, the godfather invites the bridegroom with his friends to a Turkish bath, where they go to the accompaniment of music and singing. This part of the celebration is full of laughter and song, and is continued on the forenoon of the next day in the home of the bridegroom, when the barber comes to shave him in the presence of the guests and musicians, who sing and play as on the preceding evening at the bath. The occasion is one of importance for the barber, who brings all sorts of perfumes which are purchased by the guests and poured over the bridegroom; he receives not only a large fee for his service but also a double price for the scented extracts. The young man is then dressed up while the priest and choir children who have arrived sing canticles.

In the meantime very similar festivities occur in the home of the bride, participated in by her young girl friends and relatives, except that they are not characterized by the same spirit of loud laughter and rejoicing. On the eve of the wedding the girls gather around her to sing melancholy songs, in considerable contrast with the gay, spirited music and singing taking place in the Turkish bath at the same time. Having shared the sadness, they place a rose leaf on the palm of each hand of the [84]bride, which is covered with henneh, a green Persian powder made into paste, after which each hand is carefully bandaged up. So the poor sad girl must go to bed, to sleep if she can. On the next morning her friends again arrive to take the bandages off her hands, to dress her, and to sing and dance about her. Except for the print of the rose leaf, the henneh leaves the hands orange red, which is supposed to be beautiful. The songs and dancing are again of a decidedly melancholy tone. Her white dress, together with the coat of the bridegroom, must be blessed by the priest, a ceremony which the church functionary performs alone, both articles being sent to him early in the morning. Preliminary to the day’s events, and before breakfast, both bride and bridegroom, being previously confessed, go separately to church, where they take communion. This done, the festivities described follow, bride and bridegroom are dressed, and all is in readiness for the ceremony which occurs in the late afternoon or evening.

The bride must ride to church on horseback, and having arrived she is dismounted, and later remounted without touching her feet to the ground, which rather cumbersome performance is accomplished through the help of a brother or relative, who also rides the bride’s steed while the ceremony takes place within, for the horse is not to be left riderless. The procession to the church is accompanied by musicians. Before the rail which separates the choir from the body of the church, two wooden chairs are placed, upon which the couple sit down while the people present kneel on the mats covering the floor. When the time comes for the blessing of the priest, the couple arise, step inside the choir space, and stand facing each other between the high altar and two witnesses, their foreheads touching. In this position they receive the sacrament of matrimony, answering in the affirmative the questions of the priest regarding their duties to each other and to their children. Of the bride is demanded perfect faithfulness to conjugal duties, entire obedience to the husband of whom care, patience, wisdom, and love are required. The priest, taking the right hand of the bride and placing it in the hand of the bridegroom, says, “According to the divine order God gave to our ancestors, I give thee now this wife in subjection. Wilt thou be her master?” “Through the help of God I will,” answers the bridegroom. The priest then asks the woman, “Wilt thou be obedient to him?” to which is answered, “I am obedient according to the order of God.” These questions are repeated and replied to thrice, in evident implicit belief that once would not be sufficient. Finally, the priest ties to each of their heads a cord and cross, which is again removed by him late at night in the home with special ceremony, and it is only after this performance that the couple may enter the nuptial chamber.

After the ceremony at the church the procession starts back for the home of the bridegroom’s father, the bride riding upon her horse, musician [85]playing, and choir boys singing. The water-carriers, who have supplied drinking water, break their jars noisily before the bridegroom, drenching his marriage costume and giving rather an abrupt signal to the godfather whose business it is to tip them. Noisily the procession moves along the streets until it arrives at the gate of the house. In days past it was the custom at this point in the ceremony to place a sheep ready to be sacrificed at the feet of the young couple, the poorer people contenting themselves with chickens. The butcher put his knife to the neck of the sheep saying, “May God thus put all your enemies under your feet, Amen, Amen.” Then pieces of coin mixed with raisins, pistachios, and other bits of nuts or dried fruits are showered over the people from the windows above, while the godfather leads the bridegroom within to the crowd of men, and the godmother leads the bride to the women, everybody trying to kiss the cross on their heads. The bride is then placed in the seat of honor and in her arms is laid first a little boy, and then a little girl, so that the first child may be a boy and if perchance the will of God be otherwise at least a girl. Each guest now comes to the bride to place at her feet a fruit in season. The bridegroom is called “the prince of the feast” and must never quit his seat of honor. If he does leave his chair he must place an object belonging to him upon his seat, and if he should at any time omit to do so, the assembly makes the godfather pay the necessary forfeit, which is usually a dinner. Towards nine, the guests take their leave, having eaten and sung to their uttermost desire.10

Living in the home of her patriarchal father-in-law, the young wife is subject to the severest restraints. She must wear a lightly fitting veil enclosing her face below the eyes, without which she can not appear even in the house.11 She wears a close fitting bodice fastened at the neck with silver clasps, full trousers of rose colored silk gathered in at the ankles by a filet of silver; her feet are bare, a silver girdle of curious workmanship loosely encircles her waist, and a long padded garment, open down the front, hangs from her shoulders. Not a single word must she utter to any member of the household, except when alone with her husband, and then only such as may be absolutely necessary, until she has given birth to her first child. Then she may speak to her nursling, after a while to her mother-in-law, later to her own mother, and by and by to the young girls of the household, but never in all her life may she have word with a young man not a relative. During her first year of married life, she may not go out of the house except for two visits to the church. Every morning and at [86]the end of each meal she must pour water over the hands of her father- and mother-in-law, and for a certain time after marriage, when visitors come, she must kiss their hands, except of course, for men, before whom she may not even appear.12 Apart from these troublesome restraints the young wife is treated with the utmost solicitude, and in some parts, even the peasant wife is not allowed to do outdoor work. In the mountain villages of Persian Armenia, however, the women do all the tilling in the fields, wearing their veils over their mouths as they work.13 The author here quoted states that husbands never see the mouths of their wives, who not only must not speak during the first year of married life, or until a child is born, but also may not converse freely with their husbands until six years of married life have elapsed.14

In such fashion the sanctity of the marriage relation is strictly guarded, and as one would suppose, illegitimate births are unknown in Armenia. Intermarriage among relations is forbidden, and until recent years, divorce has been unknown.15 As for the taboo on speech, it is calculated not so much as an inducement to the production of offspring as to preserve harmonious relations between the various members of the patriarchal household. Even the patriarch with all his authority would find difficulty in preserving proper decorum of speech and manners in so heterogeneous a household, if every newly acquired daughter-in-law were given a free rein in the use of her tongue. As the neophyte is made to understand his position by a brutal initiation, so the young wife is kept from assuming command over the female household by the placing of a moral valuation upon the silence which alone is compatible with the essential modesty regarded as the first and chief of virtues among wives. In the household of the patriarch there is a great deal to be done in common, and unfortunately the occasion for mutual aid is not sufficient to bring about the desired coöperation. Hence singleness of command and authority is a necessary condition, not only of efficiency, but also of peace, for it can not be supposed that so many daughters-in-law would work together in harmony. It would be a mistake, therefore, to regard the customary silence as an inducement to child-bearing.

Identifying itself with the common events of life, such as birth, marriage, and death, the church has not only given a religious meaning to these occasions but has also sanctioned and even encouraged the festivities that accompany them. These festivities have up to this point been [87]occasions for rejoicing, with the single and significant exception of the melancholy singing of the bride’s friends on the eve and day of her wedding. There is a perfect naturalness about all the merry-making and festivals so far considered, and this is no less characteristic of the funeral celebrations now to be taken up. The description of these will conclude my treatment of the last group of festivals, which are more properly festival-ceremonies, or ceremonies that have been made the occasion of festivity.

The funerals, as one would naturally suppose, are more ceremonious, more ritualistic, and although there is now generally a minimum of festivity connected with them, this has not always been so.16 When the condition of a sick person is beyond hope, the priest is notified and the person is given confession, communion, and extreme unction. After death the eyes and mouth are closed, the body washed and dressed up in the newest and cleanest clothes to be had, and the arms crossed on the breast.17 Two candles are kept burning until the day of the funeral, one at the foot and one at the head of the coffin. Sad, wooden bells are sounded, and guests are invited to pay their last respects. Coffee is served to them, but without sugar, as a sign of grief. Mourning women are secured, who eulogize the departed and weep and lament until the priests begin their chanting. The corpse is now taken to the church in a special coffin which is covered with a black velvet cloth adorned with small white crosses, among the wealthy, but among the poor the body is wrapped in linen and laid in a simple bier, carried by relatives and friends. At the head of the procession, which marches very slowly and chants on the way, there are carried a great cross and two lighted torches, followed by the priests and then by the coffin. The passer-by must stop and cross himself many times. At the church the coffin is laid down, and if the relatives are wealthy each person in the church is provided with a small wax candle which is kept lighted during the service. While the ceremony proceeds the body is blessed with holy water and perfumed with incense, after which the procession re-forms to accompany the body to the cemetery. The chanting is kept up all the way. At the cemetery the body is lowered into its last resting-place, and the priest, after making the sign of the cross on the four corners of the grave, throws three shovelfuls of earth into it and three more on the coffin. The people imitate by throwing three handfuls of dust, and the ceremony completed, all return to the home of the deceased where they [88]partake of steaming broth prepared by the neighbors and friends, and recite prayers for the soul of the dead. This latter practice, as said before, is a pagan survival, as is also the chanting of mass for the departed, which occurs three days later, at which time broth is again distributed, but this time to the poor as a sacrifice to the dead. The grave is blessed on the third day, again on the ninth, at the close of the third month, and for the last time, at the close of the year.

The funeral of a priest is performed with much splendor.18 The procession makes a circuit of all the churches, and stopping at different places, portions of the gospel are read. If the priest be of high rank, as an archbishop, or a bishop, he is carried in an open coffin and in a sitting posture, dressed up in official vestments, in which position he is interred in the courtyard of the church. Farmers send sheep to be killed and given to the poor as a sacrifice. The Greeks in Constantinople also carry their dead in an open coffin, but this is because a Greek official who was a refugee prisoner in Constantinople at the time of the war of the Turks with the Greeks, endeavored to get himself carried out of the country by feigning death and boxing himself up in a coffin. But the Turks discovered the ruse and it was enacted by the sultan that thereafter all Greeks must be carried to their graves in open coffins. The custom in respect to the Armenian bishops, however, has no connection with this.

In some parts of Armenia, as for example in Erzerum, the snow lies so deep in winter-time that burial is well-nigh impossible. During spring-time, with the melting of the snow, coffins have been found perched up on tree tops. This was related by an Armenian boy I know of, who lived in the vicinity of Erzerum. Curious customs of the past have left their marks. In Tarsus, for example, there are Armenian graves ranged about a tree which is asserted to have been planted by St. Paul, each provided with a stone upon which has been carved a symbol of the deceased, for the merchant, a representation of weights and measures, for the blacksmith, an anvil and hammer, for the scribe, an inkstand and pen, and for the industrious housewife, a distaff and spindle. In the cemetery of Nakhitchevan is a large building in which the mourners have a great repast after the funeral, and in certain other graveyards, Dubois found innumerable pieces of broken pitchers and crockery, which were probably broken, as the custom is, to ward off the evil spirit of the dead.

These four ceremonies complete the third and last group of festivals described. I have called them ceremonies because fundamentally that is what they are, but they are to be distinguished sharply from the many church ceremonies I have not so much as mentioned, by reason [89]of their festival or social value which alone makes them proper subject-matter for this thesis. The relation between these ceremonies as revealed in the common procession, as well as in the religious ceremony necessary to each is due largely to the fact that they have to do with the most ordinary, and yet most extraordinary of life’s events, birth, betrothal, marriage, and death.

Reviewing them from the standpoint of their social or festival value, it is obvious that the marriage celebration easily takes first place, the betrothal festivities second, baptism and funeral third. There is the rather uncouth, perhaps, but none the less spontaneous gaiety of the friends of the bridegroom, not only on the eve of the wedding-day when they go to the bath, but also on the morning of the wedding-day when the unfortunate youth is assuredly cured of any addiction he might have to the use of perfumes. I should imagine that the music would begin to bore the young men by the time the barber arrives, since the musicians also accompany the rejoicing of the night before, and yet it may be said that there could be nothing more convenient or ingenious devised to carry over a lull in the merry-making, for after all, the young men could not well be singing, joking, laughing, and teasing all the time. In striking contrast is the melancholy rejoicing of the party of young women at the home of the bride. But where there is dancing and singing there can not well be weeping, although no doubt it is more natural for the bride to be thoughtful on her wedding-day, than for the bridegroom, for it is the former who leaves her home to spend the rest of her days in a very new, very strange, perhaps even unkindly world. There is still another reason for the melancholy, in that the girl must know she is bidding farewell forever to the delights and joys and freedom of childhood, for although to-day she may speak and sing and make merry, to-morrow morning she must be silent and prepared to pour water over the hands of her father- and mother-in-law. Henceforth it is for her to be submissive, obedient, docile, uncomplaining even at heart, for what use will it be to complain, and though her most cherished dreams may be of motherhood, does she not also have spirit, and why must it be broken? Is she then only a chattel to be sold into everlasting bondage? It is all too evident, even to the dullest of brides, that the happiness of childhood is forever past, and the brighter one can hardly fail to feel that she has been bartered for the bit of gold about her waist or neck.

There is then the very highest of social value to be attributed to both of these festivities, and largely because in each group of people, the young men on one side, the young women on the other, there is perfect community of feeling, mutual understanding, and freedom of thought and expression. In comparison with these gatherings, the mixed assembly at the house of the bridegroom after the marriage ceremony is of little importance. [90]The succession of events covering a period of nearly thirty-six hours, of which only a few, and perhaps none at all, are spent in sleep by the members of the bridal party, must certainly begin to have its effect by the time the little baby doll is placed in the lap of the bride.

The betrothal party is always out for a good time, for they realize that the merry-making is to be an all-night affair. There is the procession with its candles lighting up the darkened streets, the music and singing filling all space, the humorous little artificialities in the house of the bride,—real enough, at least ceremoniously, from the standpoint of the family,—the syrup, the attempted stealing of utensils, the return procession, the singing, music, and dancing at the home of the young bridegroom-to-be, without stop until dawn. All of this makes a rather complete occasion, even for young people.

Baptism and funeral rites come nearest being pure ceremonies. But even the baptismal rite has its procession to and from the church participated in by all the friends and relatives of the family, and though the event is an occasion neither for rejoicing nor for sorrow, it is important enough, occurring as it does but once in the lifetime of each individual. There are, to be sure, the social calls that follow the ceremony. But the event can not be said to have any attraction for the young; and if this is true of baptism, it is still more true of funerals. Nevertheless there is the distinct psychological value of each, calling up as they do various associations, as the baptism of this one, or the death of another one, and thus keeping alive the deepest experiences of life. If they are crude and offensive to more delicate tastes, it must be remembered that a belief is represented in the concrete fashion essential to the simple mind, a mode of representation necessary to the best of intellects even though on another plane. [91]