Chapter III

Chapter IIILegends of the Conversion to ChristianitySection 1. Pre-Christian Mythology and ReligionThe 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.1An 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.2The influence of Persian worship is more clear. Aramazd, the architect of the universe, lord and creator of all things, was the chiefArmenian 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.3There 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.4Tir, 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.5Upon 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.”6The god Mihr represented fire, and was the son of Aramazd.7He 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.8It 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.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.9The “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.10She 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.”11Images 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.12The former was the wife of Vahakn, the mythical king-god, the legend in respect to whom has been told, and corresponded to the Phoenician andSidonian 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.La religion Arménienne était probablement un mélange des opinions de Zoroastre, fort alterés par le cult des divinités grecques. On voyait dans les temples de l’Arménie un grand nombre de statues de divinités, auxquelles on faisait des sacrifices d’animaux, ce qui ne se pratiquait point dans la religion de Zoroastre, qui, à proprement parler, n’admettait pas l’existence d’autre divinité que le temps sans bornes, appelé Zerwan.13Les plus puissants des dieux étaient Aramazd (Ormuzd), Anahid (Venus), Mihir (Mihr), ou Mithra. On y adorait encore d’autres divinités inférieures.Anahit, however, was goddess of chastity, and did not therefore correspond to Venus.14Section 2. Legends of Abgar, Thaddeus, and St. BartholomewThe 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.15The 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.16To 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 Christa letter asking him to come and heal him of his disease. The letter is quoted as follows:The letter of Abgarus to our Saviour Jesus Christ. “Abgarus, a prince of the world, unto Jesus the Saviour and Benefactor, who hast appeared in the City of Jerusalem, Greetings.“I have heard of thee, and of the healings wrought by thy hands, without drugs and without roots; for it is said that thou givest sight to the blind, thou makest the lame to walk, and thou cleanest the lepers; thou curest those who have been long tormented by diseases, and raisest even the dead. And when I heard all this concerning thee, I thought that either thou art God come down from heaven that workest these things, or the Son of God. I have written unto thee, that thou shouldst trouble thyself to come unto me, and heal me of my disease. I have heard also that the Jews murmur against thee, and think to torture thee. My city is a small one, but it is beautiful, and it is sufficient for us twain.”17The 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.The answer to the letter of Abgarus, written at the command of our Saviour by the Apostle Thomas: “Blessed is he who believeth on me, though he hath not seen me. For it is written concerning me thus: ‘they that have seen me believed not on me, but they that have not seen me shall believe and live.’ And concerning that which thou hast written unto me to come down unto thee, it is needful that I fulfill all that for which I was sent; and when I have fulfilled it I will ascend unto Him that sent me. And after my ascension I will send one of my disciples, who shall heal thee of thy disease, and give life unto thee and unto all that are with thee.”18This 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.19Concerning the recognition of the traditionof 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.20The 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.Section 3. Legends of Rhipsime and GregoryThese traditions have their historical setting in the reign of Tiridates, and of Chosroes the father of Tiridates.21Just 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, calledArdavan, who was overthrown (A.D. 227) by a Persian prince of the province of Fars, named Ardashir.22His 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.23The 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.24Ardashir 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.25Having 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 theArmenian 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.26For 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.27While 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.28Rhipsime, 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 girlsucceeded 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 hisHistoire du Règne de Tiridatebut unfortunately the book has been tampered with and now contains much questionable material.29There 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.30He 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 placehuge 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.31Such 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.32Gregory, 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.33Armenia, 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.34The 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 laterthan 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.Section 4. The Armenian Church as a Social ForceThe 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;35as 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.37First, 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 thespirit of the teachings of Jesus as any Christian sect that ever existed.38But 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.”39What 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.40The 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, ofNane, and of Anahit, many of which were defended by the vanquished until overpowered.41Shrines 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.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.42A 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.”43A 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.”44Already, 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),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.45The 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.”46The “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.1Clark,New Englander22:507, 672. Raffi p. 127.2That trees are worshipped even to-day, and that certain superstitions are bound up with them is clearly shown by Abeghian. “In den Gegenden Armeniens, wo das Land mit Wäldern bedeckt ist, werden viele sehr alte und grosse Bäume für heilig gehalten und ähnlicher Weise wie die Quellen verehrt. Man brennt vor ihnen Lichter. Weihrauch, opfert ihnen Hähne und Hammel, küsst sie, kriecht durch ihren gespaltenen Stamm durch, oder lässt magere Kinder durch ihre Löcher schlüpfen, um die Einwirkung der bosen Geister aufzuheben. Man glaubt dass vom Himmel Lichter auf die heiligen Bäume kommen, oder Heilige sich auf denselben aufhalten. Auch die Bäume geben Gesundheit, einige heilen alle Krankheiten.... Um von Bäumen Heilung zu bekommen soll man ein Stück von seiner Kleidung abreissen und damit den Baum umwickeln oder es auf den Baum nageln. Man glaubt dadurch seine Krankheit auf den Baum zu übertragen.” Abeghian pp. 58, 59.3Agathangelus p. 127. Emin,Recherches sur le Paganisme Arménienp. 9.4Raffi, article in Boyadjian’sArmenian Legends and Poetry.5Tir is mentioned only once by Agathangelus (p. 164) and he is not mentioned by any other Armenian writers (Langlois 1:164). Emin compares him to the Greek Hermes or Mercury, probably because Agathangelus speaks of him as the recorder or reporter of Aramazd. (Emin p. 20, note 1.)6Abeghian p. 4.7He corresponds to the Persian Mithra and is hence of Persian origin and not Greek. The Greek translation of Agathangelus regards him asanalogousto Vulcan, which Emin considers to be incorrect. (Agathangelus p. 168; Emin p. 20.)8Raffi, article in Boyadjian’sArmenian Legends and Poetry.Seklemian’sTales. Preface by Blackwell.9“Und auch heute pflegt man stellenweise niederzuknieen und zu beten: ‘O du göttliche strahlende Sonne! Dein Fuss ruhe auf meinem Antlitz! Bewahre meine Kinder.’” u. s. w. Abeghian p. 43.10Although the Greeks have identified Anahit with their goddess of chastity, Artemid, the Armenian goddess is not of Greek, but of Assyro-Babylonian origin according to Emin. Her name “Anahato” in ancient Persian means “Spotless.” Agathangelus p. 126; Emin p. 10.11Agathangelus. Langlois 1:127.12Raffi p. 129.Both Nane and Astghik are mentioned by Agathangelus who speaks of the latter as the Aphrodite of the Greeks. (Agathangelus p. 173.) Emin likens Nane to Venus. The fact is that very little is known of either. (Agathangelus p. 168; Emin, p. 16.)13St. Martin 1:305, 306.14In the reigns of Artasches I and Tigranes II, many Greek statues were imported from abroad, and the latter king not only constructed temples for the worship of Greek divinities, but also ordered all to offer sacrifices and to worship newly acquired gods and goddesses. (Moses of Khorene pp. 86–88.)15St. Martin 1:295.16Moses of Khorene p. 95.17Moses of Khorene p. 96.18Ibid.19Ormanian p. 3.20There is another legend of St. Thaddeus, according to which he converted Abgar and his whole court to Christianity, curing the king of his disease at the same time. (Moses p. 97.) Abgar, who died shortly afterword, divided his kingdom between his son and nephew. The former at once resumed the pagan worship while the latter was forced to apostatize. But the preaching and martyrdom of St. Thaddeus at the hand of Sanatruk, the nephew, is recorded by Faustus of Byzantium, one of the most reliable of early Armenian historians. (Faustus of Byzantium. Langlois 1:210. See also Lynch,Armenia1:278, and Moses of Khorene pp. 98–99.)21Lynch 1:286.22St. Martin pp. 302, 303.23Agathangelus. Langlois 1:115.24St. Martin p. 303.Agathangelus p. 122.25St. Martin p. 304. Agathangelus p. 121.26Agathangelus pp. 126–33.27Ibid.p. 135.28Lynch 1:256. Agathangelus p. 139.29Critics have distinguished Agathangelus, the historian, from Pseudo Agathangelus, the meddler, who evidently had religious interests at stake. The former lived in the fourth century, and was secretary to Tiridates, who unquestionably commissioned him to keep the records of the events of his reign. He is spoken of by Moses and other ancient historians as sincere and reliable. It is thus assumed that the original work has been destroyed or lost, and that the Greek and Armenian texts now existing are the work of an interpolater who desired to weave the straggling skeins of religious sentiment into a single garment by establishing an historic and literary sanction to the religious events of the period of the conversion. There are many indications of this, chief of which is the highly imaginative style of narrative, undoubtedly designed with the particular intent of capturing the minds of the people. (Langlois’ introduction to Agathangelus 1:99–108.)30Langlois in his footnotes states that the chapel consecrated to St. Gaiane was constructed by the Katholikos Ezdras in the year 630. and repaired in 1652. The church of St. Rhipsime was built by the Katholikos Gomidas in 618, and repaired in 1653. The main cathedral was built by St. Gregory. They are situated in Etchmiadzin. (Dubois 3:213. Langlois 1:160, 162.)31Lynch 1:291, note.32Dubois 3:276.33Bryce pp. 314, 315.34Ormanian p. 13.35Dubois 3:276.36Ormanian p. 8.37Agathangelus pp. 164–66.38See Conybeare’s translation and annotation of theKey of Truth, the book of the Paulicians (Adoptionists) of Thonrak. This book contains the baptismal and ordinal service of the Adoptionist church. (Especially pp. vi–xcxii.)39Conybeare p. xcvii. The original is given by Conybeare as follows: “Dic mihi,” says Archelaus, “super quem Spiritus Sanctus sicut columba descendit. Quis est etiam qui baptizatur a Ioanne si perfectus erat, si Filius erat, si vertus erat, non poterat Spiritus ingredi; sicut nee regnum potest ingredi intra regnum.”Lynch 1:279.40Ibid.1:282.41Lynch 1:294.Agathangelus pp. 164–66.42St. Martin 1: appendix.Elisée Vartabed,Histoire de Vartan. Langlois 2:190–91.43Ibid.p. 195.44Lidgett,An Ancient People.The detailed events of this struggle against the Persians are told in theHistoire de Vartan et de la Guerre des Arméniens, by Elisée Vartabed who belonged to the second order of translators and served under General Vartan during the war, the history of which he narrates.After the sad ending of the series of dramatic incidents that made up this struggle for religious freedom, Elisée sought solitude and lived on herbs and roots in a mountainside cave which came to be known as the “cave of Elisée.” Because of a growing social intimacy he was obliged to find a second cave in a more remote section of the country, where he completed his work and died. His history is written in the style of a religious mystic, is full of dramatic imagery, and has come down as an Armenian classic. (Langlois 2:179–82.)45Lynch 1:313.Ormanian p. 35.46Ibid.p. 36.

Chapter IIILegends of the Conversion to ChristianitySection 1. Pre-Christian Mythology and ReligionThe 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.1An 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.2The influence of Persian worship is more clear. Aramazd, the architect of the universe, lord and creator of all things, was the chiefArmenian 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.3There 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.4Tir, 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.5Upon 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.”6The god Mihr represented fire, and was the son of Aramazd.7He 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.8It 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.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.9The “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.10She 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.”11Images 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.12The former was the wife of Vahakn, the mythical king-god, the legend in respect to whom has been told, and corresponded to the Phoenician andSidonian 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.La religion Arménienne était probablement un mélange des opinions de Zoroastre, fort alterés par le cult des divinités grecques. On voyait dans les temples de l’Arménie un grand nombre de statues de divinités, auxquelles on faisait des sacrifices d’animaux, ce qui ne se pratiquait point dans la religion de Zoroastre, qui, à proprement parler, n’admettait pas l’existence d’autre divinité que le temps sans bornes, appelé Zerwan.13Les plus puissants des dieux étaient Aramazd (Ormuzd), Anahid (Venus), Mihir (Mihr), ou Mithra. On y adorait encore d’autres divinités inférieures.Anahit, however, was goddess of chastity, and did not therefore correspond to Venus.14Section 2. Legends of Abgar, Thaddeus, and St. BartholomewThe 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.15The 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.16To 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 Christa letter asking him to come and heal him of his disease. The letter is quoted as follows:The letter of Abgarus to our Saviour Jesus Christ. “Abgarus, a prince of the world, unto Jesus the Saviour and Benefactor, who hast appeared in the City of Jerusalem, Greetings.“I have heard of thee, and of the healings wrought by thy hands, without drugs and without roots; for it is said that thou givest sight to the blind, thou makest the lame to walk, and thou cleanest the lepers; thou curest those who have been long tormented by diseases, and raisest even the dead. And when I heard all this concerning thee, I thought that either thou art God come down from heaven that workest these things, or the Son of God. I have written unto thee, that thou shouldst trouble thyself to come unto me, and heal me of my disease. I have heard also that the Jews murmur against thee, and think to torture thee. My city is a small one, but it is beautiful, and it is sufficient for us twain.”17The 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.The answer to the letter of Abgarus, written at the command of our Saviour by the Apostle Thomas: “Blessed is he who believeth on me, though he hath not seen me. For it is written concerning me thus: ‘they that have seen me believed not on me, but they that have not seen me shall believe and live.’ And concerning that which thou hast written unto me to come down unto thee, it is needful that I fulfill all that for which I was sent; and when I have fulfilled it I will ascend unto Him that sent me. And after my ascension I will send one of my disciples, who shall heal thee of thy disease, and give life unto thee and unto all that are with thee.”18This 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.19Concerning the recognition of the traditionof 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.20The 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.Section 3. Legends of Rhipsime and GregoryThese traditions have their historical setting in the reign of Tiridates, and of Chosroes the father of Tiridates.21Just 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, calledArdavan, who was overthrown (A.D. 227) by a Persian prince of the province of Fars, named Ardashir.22His 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.23The 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.24Ardashir 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.25Having 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 theArmenian 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.26For 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.27While 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.28Rhipsime, 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 girlsucceeded 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 hisHistoire du Règne de Tiridatebut unfortunately the book has been tampered with and now contains much questionable material.29There 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.30He 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 placehuge 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.31Such 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.32Gregory, 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.33Armenia, 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.34The 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 laterthan 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.Section 4. The Armenian Church as a Social ForceThe 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;35as 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.37First, 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 thespirit of the teachings of Jesus as any Christian sect that ever existed.38But 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.”39What 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.40The 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, ofNane, and of Anahit, many of which were defended by the vanquished until overpowered.41Shrines 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.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.42A 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.”43A 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.”44Already, 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),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.45The 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.”46The “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.1Clark,New Englander22:507, 672. Raffi p. 127.2That trees are worshipped even to-day, and that certain superstitions are bound up with them is clearly shown by Abeghian. “In den Gegenden Armeniens, wo das Land mit Wäldern bedeckt ist, werden viele sehr alte und grosse Bäume für heilig gehalten und ähnlicher Weise wie die Quellen verehrt. Man brennt vor ihnen Lichter. Weihrauch, opfert ihnen Hähne und Hammel, küsst sie, kriecht durch ihren gespaltenen Stamm durch, oder lässt magere Kinder durch ihre Löcher schlüpfen, um die Einwirkung der bosen Geister aufzuheben. Man glaubt dass vom Himmel Lichter auf die heiligen Bäume kommen, oder Heilige sich auf denselben aufhalten. Auch die Bäume geben Gesundheit, einige heilen alle Krankheiten.... Um von Bäumen Heilung zu bekommen soll man ein Stück von seiner Kleidung abreissen und damit den Baum umwickeln oder es auf den Baum nageln. Man glaubt dadurch seine Krankheit auf den Baum zu übertragen.” Abeghian pp. 58, 59.3Agathangelus p. 127. Emin,Recherches sur le Paganisme Arménienp. 9.4Raffi, article in Boyadjian’sArmenian Legends and Poetry.5Tir is mentioned only once by Agathangelus (p. 164) and he is not mentioned by any other Armenian writers (Langlois 1:164). Emin compares him to the Greek Hermes or Mercury, probably because Agathangelus speaks of him as the recorder or reporter of Aramazd. (Emin p. 20, note 1.)6Abeghian p. 4.7He corresponds to the Persian Mithra and is hence of Persian origin and not Greek. The Greek translation of Agathangelus regards him asanalogousto Vulcan, which Emin considers to be incorrect. (Agathangelus p. 168; Emin p. 20.)8Raffi, article in Boyadjian’sArmenian Legends and Poetry.Seklemian’sTales. Preface by Blackwell.9“Und auch heute pflegt man stellenweise niederzuknieen und zu beten: ‘O du göttliche strahlende Sonne! Dein Fuss ruhe auf meinem Antlitz! Bewahre meine Kinder.’” u. s. w. Abeghian p. 43.10Although the Greeks have identified Anahit with their goddess of chastity, Artemid, the Armenian goddess is not of Greek, but of Assyro-Babylonian origin according to Emin. Her name “Anahato” in ancient Persian means “Spotless.” Agathangelus p. 126; Emin p. 10.11Agathangelus. Langlois 1:127.12Raffi p. 129.Both Nane and Astghik are mentioned by Agathangelus who speaks of the latter as the Aphrodite of the Greeks. (Agathangelus p. 173.) Emin likens Nane to Venus. The fact is that very little is known of either. (Agathangelus p. 168; Emin, p. 16.)13St. Martin 1:305, 306.14In the reigns of Artasches I and Tigranes II, many Greek statues were imported from abroad, and the latter king not only constructed temples for the worship of Greek divinities, but also ordered all to offer sacrifices and to worship newly acquired gods and goddesses. (Moses of Khorene pp. 86–88.)15St. Martin 1:295.16Moses of Khorene p. 95.17Moses of Khorene p. 96.18Ibid.19Ormanian p. 3.20There is another legend of St. Thaddeus, according to which he converted Abgar and his whole court to Christianity, curing the king of his disease at the same time. (Moses p. 97.) Abgar, who died shortly afterword, divided his kingdom between his son and nephew. The former at once resumed the pagan worship while the latter was forced to apostatize. But the preaching and martyrdom of St. Thaddeus at the hand of Sanatruk, the nephew, is recorded by Faustus of Byzantium, one of the most reliable of early Armenian historians. (Faustus of Byzantium. Langlois 1:210. See also Lynch,Armenia1:278, and Moses of Khorene pp. 98–99.)21Lynch 1:286.22St. Martin pp. 302, 303.23Agathangelus. Langlois 1:115.24St. Martin p. 303.Agathangelus p. 122.25St. Martin p. 304. Agathangelus p. 121.26Agathangelus pp. 126–33.27Ibid.p. 135.28Lynch 1:256. Agathangelus p. 139.29Critics have distinguished Agathangelus, the historian, from Pseudo Agathangelus, the meddler, who evidently had religious interests at stake. The former lived in the fourth century, and was secretary to Tiridates, who unquestionably commissioned him to keep the records of the events of his reign. He is spoken of by Moses and other ancient historians as sincere and reliable. It is thus assumed that the original work has been destroyed or lost, and that the Greek and Armenian texts now existing are the work of an interpolater who desired to weave the straggling skeins of religious sentiment into a single garment by establishing an historic and literary sanction to the religious events of the period of the conversion. There are many indications of this, chief of which is the highly imaginative style of narrative, undoubtedly designed with the particular intent of capturing the minds of the people. (Langlois’ introduction to Agathangelus 1:99–108.)30Langlois in his footnotes states that the chapel consecrated to St. Gaiane was constructed by the Katholikos Ezdras in the year 630. and repaired in 1652. The church of St. Rhipsime was built by the Katholikos Gomidas in 618, and repaired in 1653. The main cathedral was built by St. Gregory. They are situated in Etchmiadzin. (Dubois 3:213. Langlois 1:160, 162.)31Lynch 1:291, note.32Dubois 3:276.33Bryce pp. 314, 315.34Ormanian p. 13.35Dubois 3:276.36Ormanian p. 8.37Agathangelus pp. 164–66.38See Conybeare’s translation and annotation of theKey of Truth, the book of the Paulicians (Adoptionists) of Thonrak. This book contains the baptismal and ordinal service of the Adoptionist church. (Especially pp. vi–xcxii.)39Conybeare p. xcvii. The original is given by Conybeare as follows: “Dic mihi,” says Archelaus, “super quem Spiritus Sanctus sicut columba descendit. Quis est etiam qui baptizatur a Ioanne si perfectus erat, si Filius erat, si vertus erat, non poterat Spiritus ingredi; sicut nee regnum potest ingredi intra regnum.”Lynch 1:279.40Ibid.1:282.41Lynch 1:294.Agathangelus pp. 164–66.42St. Martin 1: appendix.Elisée Vartabed,Histoire de Vartan. Langlois 2:190–91.43Ibid.p. 195.44Lidgett,An Ancient People.The detailed events of this struggle against the Persians are told in theHistoire de Vartan et de la Guerre des Arméniens, by Elisée Vartabed who belonged to the second order of translators and served under General Vartan during the war, the history of which he narrates.After the sad ending of the series of dramatic incidents that made up this struggle for religious freedom, Elisée sought solitude and lived on herbs and roots in a mountainside cave which came to be known as the “cave of Elisée.” Because of a growing social intimacy he was obliged to find a second cave in a more remote section of the country, where he completed his work and died. His history is written in the style of a religious mystic, is full of dramatic imagery, and has come down as an Armenian classic. (Langlois 2:179–82.)45Lynch 1:313.Ormanian p. 35.46Ibid.p. 36.

Chapter IIILegends of the Conversion to ChristianitySection 1. Pre-Christian Mythology and ReligionThe 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.1An 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.2The influence of Persian worship is more clear. Aramazd, the architect of the universe, lord and creator of all things, was the chiefArmenian 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.3There 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.4Tir, 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.5Upon 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.”6The god Mihr represented fire, and was the son of Aramazd.7He 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.8It 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.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.9The “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.10She 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.”11Images 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.12The former was the wife of Vahakn, the mythical king-god, the legend in respect to whom has been told, and corresponded to the Phoenician andSidonian 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.La religion Arménienne était probablement un mélange des opinions de Zoroastre, fort alterés par le cult des divinités grecques. On voyait dans les temples de l’Arménie un grand nombre de statues de divinités, auxquelles on faisait des sacrifices d’animaux, ce qui ne se pratiquait point dans la religion de Zoroastre, qui, à proprement parler, n’admettait pas l’existence d’autre divinité que le temps sans bornes, appelé Zerwan.13Les plus puissants des dieux étaient Aramazd (Ormuzd), Anahid (Venus), Mihir (Mihr), ou Mithra. On y adorait encore d’autres divinités inférieures.Anahit, however, was goddess of chastity, and did not therefore correspond to Venus.14Section 2. Legends of Abgar, Thaddeus, and St. BartholomewThe 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.15The 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.16To 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 Christa letter asking him to come and heal him of his disease. The letter is quoted as follows:The letter of Abgarus to our Saviour Jesus Christ. “Abgarus, a prince of the world, unto Jesus the Saviour and Benefactor, who hast appeared in the City of Jerusalem, Greetings.“I have heard of thee, and of the healings wrought by thy hands, without drugs and without roots; for it is said that thou givest sight to the blind, thou makest the lame to walk, and thou cleanest the lepers; thou curest those who have been long tormented by diseases, and raisest even the dead. And when I heard all this concerning thee, I thought that either thou art God come down from heaven that workest these things, or the Son of God. I have written unto thee, that thou shouldst trouble thyself to come unto me, and heal me of my disease. I have heard also that the Jews murmur against thee, and think to torture thee. My city is a small one, but it is beautiful, and it is sufficient for us twain.”17The 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.The answer to the letter of Abgarus, written at the command of our Saviour by the Apostle Thomas: “Blessed is he who believeth on me, though he hath not seen me. For it is written concerning me thus: ‘they that have seen me believed not on me, but they that have not seen me shall believe and live.’ And concerning that which thou hast written unto me to come down unto thee, it is needful that I fulfill all that for which I was sent; and when I have fulfilled it I will ascend unto Him that sent me. And after my ascension I will send one of my disciples, who shall heal thee of thy disease, and give life unto thee and unto all that are with thee.”18This 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.19Concerning the recognition of the traditionof 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.20The 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.Section 3. Legends of Rhipsime and GregoryThese traditions have their historical setting in the reign of Tiridates, and of Chosroes the father of Tiridates.21Just 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, calledArdavan, who was overthrown (A.D. 227) by a Persian prince of the province of Fars, named Ardashir.22His 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.23The 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.24Ardashir 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.25Having 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 theArmenian 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.26For 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.27While 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.28Rhipsime, 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 girlsucceeded 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 hisHistoire du Règne de Tiridatebut unfortunately the book has been tampered with and now contains much questionable material.29There 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.30He 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 placehuge 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.31Such 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.32Gregory, 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.33Armenia, 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.34The 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 laterthan 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.Section 4. The Armenian Church as a Social ForceThe 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;35as 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.37First, 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 thespirit of the teachings of Jesus as any Christian sect that ever existed.38But 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.”39What 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.40The 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, ofNane, and of Anahit, many of which were defended by the vanquished until overpowered.41Shrines 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.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.42A 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.”43A 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.”44Already, 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),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.45The 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.”46The “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.1Clark,New Englander22:507, 672. Raffi p. 127.2That trees are worshipped even to-day, and that certain superstitions are bound up with them is clearly shown by Abeghian. “In den Gegenden Armeniens, wo das Land mit Wäldern bedeckt ist, werden viele sehr alte und grosse Bäume für heilig gehalten und ähnlicher Weise wie die Quellen verehrt. Man brennt vor ihnen Lichter. Weihrauch, opfert ihnen Hähne und Hammel, küsst sie, kriecht durch ihren gespaltenen Stamm durch, oder lässt magere Kinder durch ihre Löcher schlüpfen, um die Einwirkung der bosen Geister aufzuheben. Man glaubt dass vom Himmel Lichter auf die heiligen Bäume kommen, oder Heilige sich auf denselben aufhalten. Auch die Bäume geben Gesundheit, einige heilen alle Krankheiten.... Um von Bäumen Heilung zu bekommen soll man ein Stück von seiner Kleidung abreissen und damit den Baum umwickeln oder es auf den Baum nageln. Man glaubt dadurch seine Krankheit auf den Baum zu übertragen.” Abeghian pp. 58, 59.3Agathangelus p. 127. Emin,Recherches sur le Paganisme Arménienp. 9.4Raffi, article in Boyadjian’sArmenian Legends and Poetry.5Tir is mentioned only once by Agathangelus (p. 164) and he is not mentioned by any other Armenian writers (Langlois 1:164). Emin compares him to the Greek Hermes or Mercury, probably because Agathangelus speaks of him as the recorder or reporter of Aramazd. (Emin p. 20, note 1.)6Abeghian p. 4.7He corresponds to the Persian Mithra and is hence of Persian origin and not Greek. The Greek translation of Agathangelus regards him asanalogousto Vulcan, which Emin considers to be incorrect. (Agathangelus p. 168; Emin p. 20.)8Raffi, article in Boyadjian’sArmenian Legends and Poetry.Seklemian’sTales. Preface by Blackwell.9“Und auch heute pflegt man stellenweise niederzuknieen und zu beten: ‘O du göttliche strahlende Sonne! Dein Fuss ruhe auf meinem Antlitz! Bewahre meine Kinder.’” u. s. w. Abeghian p. 43.10Although the Greeks have identified Anahit with their goddess of chastity, Artemid, the Armenian goddess is not of Greek, but of Assyro-Babylonian origin according to Emin. Her name “Anahato” in ancient Persian means “Spotless.” Agathangelus p. 126; Emin p. 10.11Agathangelus. Langlois 1:127.12Raffi p. 129.Both Nane and Astghik are mentioned by Agathangelus who speaks of the latter as the Aphrodite of the Greeks. (Agathangelus p. 173.) Emin likens Nane to Venus. The fact is that very little is known of either. (Agathangelus p. 168; Emin, p. 16.)13St. Martin 1:305, 306.14In the reigns of Artasches I and Tigranes II, many Greek statues were imported from abroad, and the latter king not only constructed temples for the worship of Greek divinities, but also ordered all to offer sacrifices and to worship newly acquired gods and goddesses. (Moses of Khorene pp. 86–88.)15St. Martin 1:295.16Moses of Khorene p. 95.17Moses of Khorene p. 96.18Ibid.19Ormanian p. 3.20There is another legend of St. Thaddeus, according to which he converted Abgar and his whole court to Christianity, curing the king of his disease at the same time. (Moses p. 97.) Abgar, who died shortly afterword, divided his kingdom between his son and nephew. The former at once resumed the pagan worship while the latter was forced to apostatize. But the preaching and martyrdom of St. Thaddeus at the hand of Sanatruk, the nephew, is recorded by Faustus of Byzantium, one of the most reliable of early Armenian historians. (Faustus of Byzantium. Langlois 1:210. See also Lynch,Armenia1:278, and Moses of Khorene pp. 98–99.)21Lynch 1:286.22St. Martin pp. 302, 303.23Agathangelus. Langlois 1:115.24St. Martin p. 303.Agathangelus p. 122.25St. Martin p. 304. Agathangelus p. 121.26Agathangelus pp. 126–33.27Ibid.p. 135.28Lynch 1:256. Agathangelus p. 139.29Critics have distinguished Agathangelus, the historian, from Pseudo Agathangelus, the meddler, who evidently had religious interests at stake. The former lived in the fourth century, and was secretary to Tiridates, who unquestionably commissioned him to keep the records of the events of his reign. He is spoken of by Moses and other ancient historians as sincere and reliable. It is thus assumed that the original work has been destroyed or lost, and that the Greek and Armenian texts now existing are the work of an interpolater who desired to weave the straggling skeins of religious sentiment into a single garment by establishing an historic and literary sanction to the religious events of the period of the conversion. There are many indications of this, chief of which is the highly imaginative style of narrative, undoubtedly designed with the particular intent of capturing the minds of the people. (Langlois’ introduction to Agathangelus 1:99–108.)30Langlois in his footnotes states that the chapel consecrated to St. Gaiane was constructed by the Katholikos Ezdras in the year 630. and repaired in 1652. The church of St. Rhipsime was built by the Katholikos Gomidas in 618, and repaired in 1653. The main cathedral was built by St. Gregory. They are situated in Etchmiadzin. (Dubois 3:213. Langlois 1:160, 162.)31Lynch 1:291, note.32Dubois 3:276.33Bryce pp. 314, 315.34Ormanian p. 13.35Dubois 3:276.36Ormanian p. 8.37Agathangelus pp. 164–66.38See Conybeare’s translation and annotation of theKey of Truth, the book of the Paulicians (Adoptionists) of Thonrak. This book contains the baptismal and ordinal service of the Adoptionist church. (Especially pp. vi–xcxii.)39Conybeare p. xcvii. The original is given by Conybeare as follows: “Dic mihi,” says Archelaus, “super quem Spiritus Sanctus sicut columba descendit. Quis est etiam qui baptizatur a Ioanne si perfectus erat, si Filius erat, si vertus erat, non poterat Spiritus ingredi; sicut nee regnum potest ingredi intra regnum.”Lynch 1:279.40Ibid.1:282.41Lynch 1:294.Agathangelus pp. 164–66.42St. Martin 1: appendix.Elisée Vartabed,Histoire de Vartan. Langlois 2:190–91.43Ibid.p. 195.44Lidgett,An Ancient People.The detailed events of this struggle against the Persians are told in theHistoire de Vartan et de la Guerre des Arméniens, by Elisée Vartabed who belonged to the second order of translators and served under General Vartan during the war, the history of which he narrates.After the sad ending of the series of dramatic incidents that made up this struggle for religious freedom, Elisée sought solitude and lived on herbs and roots in a mountainside cave which came to be known as the “cave of Elisée.” Because of a growing social intimacy he was obliged to find a second cave in a more remote section of the country, where he completed his work and died. His history is written in the style of a religious mystic, is full of dramatic imagery, and has come down as an Armenian classic. (Langlois 2:179–82.)45Lynch 1:313.Ormanian p. 35.46Ibid.p. 36.

Chapter IIILegends of the Conversion to ChristianitySection 1. Pre-Christian Mythology and ReligionThe 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.1An 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.2The influence of Persian worship is more clear. Aramazd, the architect of the universe, lord and creator of all things, was the chiefArmenian 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.3There 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.4Tir, 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.5Upon 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.”6The god Mihr represented fire, and was the son of Aramazd.7He 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.8It 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.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.9The “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.10She 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.”11Images 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.12The former was the wife of Vahakn, the mythical king-god, the legend in respect to whom has been told, and corresponded to the Phoenician andSidonian 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.La religion Arménienne était probablement un mélange des opinions de Zoroastre, fort alterés par le cult des divinités grecques. On voyait dans les temples de l’Arménie un grand nombre de statues de divinités, auxquelles on faisait des sacrifices d’animaux, ce qui ne se pratiquait point dans la religion de Zoroastre, qui, à proprement parler, n’admettait pas l’existence d’autre divinité que le temps sans bornes, appelé Zerwan.13Les plus puissants des dieux étaient Aramazd (Ormuzd), Anahid (Venus), Mihir (Mihr), ou Mithra. On y adorait encore d’autres divinités inférieures.Anahit, however, was goddess of chastity, and did not therefore correspond to Venus.14Section 2. Legends of Abgar, Thaddeus, and St. BartholomewThe 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.15The 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.16To 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 Christa letter asking him to come and heal him of his disease. The letter is quoted as follows:The letter of Abgarus to our Saviour Jesus Christ. “Abgarus, a prince of the world, unto Jesus the Saviour and Benefactor, who hast appeared in the City of Jerusalem, Greetings.“I have heard of thee, and of the healings wrought by thy hands, without drugs and without roots; for it is said that thou givest sight to the blind, thou makest the lame to walk, and thou cleanest the lepers; thou curest those who have been long tormented by diseases, and raisest even the dead. And when I heard all this concerning thee, I thought that either thou art God come down from heaven that workest these things, or the Son of God. I have written unto thee, that thou shouldst trouble thyself to come unto me, and heal me of my disease. I have heard also that the Jews murmur against thee, and think to torture thee. My city is a small one, but it is beautiful, and it is sufficient for us twain.”17The 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.The answer to the letter of Abgarus, written at the command of our Saviour by the Apostle Thomas: “Blessed is he who believeth on me, though he hath not seen me. For it is written concerning me thus: ‘they that have seen me believed not on me, but they that have not seen me shall believe and live.’ And concerning that which thou hast written unto me to come down unto thee, it is needful that I fulfill all that for which I was sent; and when I have fulfilled it I will ascend unto Him that sent me. And after my ascension I will send one of my disciples, who shall heal thee of thy disease, and give life unto thee and unto all that are with thee.”18This 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.19Concerning the recognition of the traditionof 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.20The 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.Section 3. Legends of Rhipsime and GregoryThese traditions have their historical setting in the reign of Tiridates, and of Chosroes the father of Tiridates.21Just 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, calledArdavan, who was overthrown (A.D. 227) by a Persian prince of the province of Fars, named Ardashir.22His 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.23The 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.24Ardashir 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.25Having 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 theArmenian 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.26For 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.27While 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.28Rhipsime, 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 girlsucceeded 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 hisHistoire du Règne de Tiridatebut unfortunately the book has been tampered with and now contains much questionable material.29There 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.30He 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 placehuge 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.31Such 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.32Gregory, 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.33Armenia, 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.34The 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 laterthan 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.Section 4. The Armenian Church as a Social ForceThe 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;35as 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.37First, 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 thespirit of the teachings of Jesus as any Christian sect that ever existed.38But 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.”39What 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.40The 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, ofNane, and of Anahit, many of which were defended by the vanquished until overpowered.41Shrines 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.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.42A 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.”43A 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.”44Already, 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),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.45The 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.”46The “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.

Section 1. Pre-Christian Mythology and ReligionThe 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.1An 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.2The influence of Persian worship is more clear. Aramazd, the architect of the universe, lord and creator of all things, was the chiefArmenian 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.3There 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.4Tir, 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.5Upon 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.”6The god Mihr represented fire, and was the son of Aramazd.7He 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.8It 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.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.9The “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.10She 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.”11Images 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.12The former was the wife of Vahakn, the mythical king-god, the legend in respect to whom has been told, and corresponded to the Phoenician andSidonian 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.La religion Arménienne était probablement un mélange des opinions de Zoroastre, fort alterés par le cult des divinités grecques. On voyait dans les temples de l’Arménie un grand nombre de statues de divinités, auxquelles on faisait des sacrifices d’animaux, ce qui ne se pratiquait point dans la religion de Zoroastre, qui, à proprement parler, n’admettait pas l’existence d’autre divinité que le temps sans bornes, appelé Zerwan.13Les plus puissants des dieux étaient Aramazd (Ormuzd), Anahid (Venus), Mihir (Mihr), ou Mithra. On y adorait encore d’autres divinités inférieures.Anahit, however, was goddess of chastity, and did not therefore correspond to Venus.14

Section 1. Pre-Christian Mythology and Religion

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.1An 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.2The influence of Persian worship is more clear. Aramazd, the architect of the universe, lord and creator of all things, was the chiefArmenian 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.3There 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.4Tir, 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.5Upon 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.”6The god Mihr represented fire, and was the son of Aramazd.7He 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.8It 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.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.9The “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.10She 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.”11Images 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.12The former was the wife of Vahakn, the mythical king-god, the legend in respect to whom has been told, and corresponded to the Phoenician andSidonian 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.La religion Arménienne était probablement un mélange des opinions de Zoroastre, fort alterés par le cult des divinités grecques. On voyait dans les temples de l’Arménie un grand nombre de statues de divinités, auxquelles on faisait des sacrifices d’animaux, ce qui ne se pratiquait point dans la religion de Zoroastre, qui, à proprement parler, n’admettait pas l’existence d’autre divinité que le temps sans bornes, appelé Zerwan.13Les plus puissants des dieux étaient Aramazd (Ormuzd), Anahid (Venus), Mihir (Mihr), ou Mithra. On y adorait encore d’autres divinités inférieures.Anahit, however, was goddess of chastity, and did not therefore correspond to Venus.14

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.1An 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 chiefArmenian 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.3There 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.4Tir, 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.5Upon 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.7He 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.8It 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.

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.9The “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.10She 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.”11Images 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.12The former was the wife of Vahakn, the mythical king-god, the legend in respect to whom has been told, and corresponded to the Phoenician andSidonian 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.

La religion Arménienne était probablement un mélange des opinions de Zoroastre, fort alterés par le cult des divinités grecques. On voyait dans les temples de l’Arménie un grand nombre de statues de divinités, auxquelles on faisait des sacrifices d’animaux, ce qui ne se pratiquait point dans la religion de Zoroastre, qui, à proprement parler, n’admettait pas l’existence d’autre divinité que le temps sans bornes, appelé Zerwan.13Les plus puissants des dieux étaient Aramazd (Ormuzd), Anahid (Venus), Mihir (Mihr), ou Mithra. On y adorait encore d’autres divinités inférieures.

La religion Arménienne était probablement un mélange des opinions de Zoroastre, fort alterés par le cult des divinités grecques. On voyait dans les temples de l’Arménie un grand nombre de statues de divinités, auxquelles on faisait des sacrifices d’animaux, ce qui ne se pratiquait point dans la religion de Zoroastre, qui, à proprement parler, n’admettait pas l’existence d’autre divinité que le temps sans bornes, appelé Zerwan.13Les plus puissants des dieux étaient Aramazd (Ormuzd), Anahid (Venus), Mihir (Mihr), ou Mithra. On y adorait encore d’autres divinités inférieures.

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

Section 2. Legends of Abgar, Thaddeus, and St. BartholomewThe 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.15The 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.16To 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 Christa letter asking him to come and heal him of his disease. The letter is quoted as follows:The letter of Abgarus to our Saviour Jesus Christ. “Abgarus, a prince of the world, unto Jesus the Saviour and Benefactor, who hast appeared in the City of Jerusalem, Greetings.“I have heard of thee, and of the healings wrought by thy hands, without drugs and without roots; for it is said that thou givest sight to the blind, thou makest the lame to walk, and thou cleanest the lepers; thou curest those who have been long tormented by diseases, and raisest even the dead. And when I heard all this concerning thee, I thought that either thou art God come down from heaven that workest these things, or the Son of God. I have written unto thee, that thou shouldst trouble thyself to come unto me, and heal me of my disease. I have heard also that the Jews murmur against thee, and think to torture thee. My city is a small one, but it is beautiful, and it is sufficient for us twain.”17The 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.The answer to the letter of Abgarus, written at the command of our Saviour by the Apostle Thomas: “Blessed is he who believeth on me, though he hath not seen me. For it is written concerning me thus: ‘they that have seen me believed not on me, but they that have not seen me shall believe and live.’ And concerning that which thou hast written unto me to come down unto thee, it is needful that I fulfill all that for which I was sent; and when I have fulfilled it I will ascend unto Him that sent me. And after my ascension I will send one of my disciples, who shall heal thee of thy disease, and give life unto thee and unto all that are with thee.”18This 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.19Concerning the recognition of the traditionof 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.20The 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.

Section 2. Legends of Abgar, Thaddeus, and St. Bartholomew

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.15The 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.16To 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 Christa letter asking him to come and heal him of his disease. The letter is quoted as follows:The letter of Abgarus to our Saviour Jesus Christ. “Abgarus, a prince of the world, unto Jesus the Saviour and Benefactor, who hast appeared in the City of Jerusalem, Greetings.“I have heard of thee, and of the healings wrought by thy hands, without drugs and without roots; for it is said that thou givest sight to the blind, thou makest the lame to walk, and thou cleanest the lepers; thou curest those who have been long tormented by diseases, and raisest even the dead. And when I heard all this concerning thee, I thought that either thou art God come down from heaven that workest these things, or the Son of God. I have written unto thee, that thou shouldst trouble thyself to come unto me, and heal me of my disease. I have heard also that the Jews murmur against thee, and think to torture thee. My city is a small one, but it is beautiful, and it is sufficient for us twain.”17The 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.The answer to the letter of Abgarus, written at the command of our Saviour by the Apostle Thomas: “Blessed is he who believeth on me, though he hath not seen me. For it is written concerning me thus: ‘they that have seen me believed not on me, but they that have not seen me shall believe and live.’ And concerning that which thou hast written unto me to come down unto thee, it is needful that I fulfill all that for which I was sent; and when I have fulfilled it I will ascend unto Him that sent me. And after my ascension I will send one of my disciples, who shall heal thee of thy disease, and give life unto thee and unto all that are with thee.”18This 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.19Concerning the recognition of the traditionof 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.20The 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.

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.15The 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.16To 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 Christa letter asking him to come and heal him of his disease. The letter is quoted as follows:

The letter of Abgarus to our Saviour Jesus Christ. “Abgarus, a prince of the world, unto Jesus the Saviour and Benefactor, who hast appeared in the City of Jerusalem, Greetings.“I have heard of thee, and of the healings wrought by thy hands, without drugs and without roots; for it is said that thou givest sight to the blind, thou makest the lame to walk, and thou cleanest the lepers; thou curest those who have been long tormented by diseases, and raisest even the dead. And when I heard all this concerning thee, I thought that either thou art God come down from heaven that workest these things, or the Son of God. I have written unto thee, that thou shouldst trouble thyself to come unto me, and heal me of my disease. I have heard also that the Jews murmur against thee, and think to torture thee. My city is a small one, but it is beautiful, and it is sufficient for us twain.”17

The letter of Abgarus to our Saviour Jesus Christ. “Abgarus, a prince of the world, unto Jesus the Saviour and Benefactor, who hast appeared in the City of Jerusalem, Greetings.

“I have heard of thee, and of the healings wrought by thy hands, without drugs and without roots; for it is said that thou givest sight to the blind, thou makest the lame to walk, and thou cleanest the lepers; thou curest those who have been long tormented by diseases, and raisest even the dead. And when I heard all this concerning thee, I thought that either thou art God come down from heaven that workest these things, or the Son of God. I have written unto thee, that thou shouldst trouble thyself to come unto me, and heal me of my disease. I have heard also that the Jews murmur against thee, and think to torture thee. My city is a small one, but it is beautiful, and it is sufficient for us twain.”17

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.

The answer to the letter of Abgarus, written at the command of our Saviour by the Apostle Thomas: “Blessed is he who believeth on me, though he hath not seen me. For it is written concerning me thus: ‘they that have seen me believed not on me, but they that have not seen me shall believe and live.’ And concerning that which thou hast written unto me to come down unto thee, it is needful that I fulfill all that for which I was sent; and when I have fulfilled it I will ascend unto Him that sent me. And after my ascension I will send one of my disciples, who shall heal thee of thy disease, and give life unto thee and unto all that are with thee.”18

The answer to the letter of Abgarus, written at the command of our Saviour by the Apostle Thomas: “Blessed is he who believeth on me, though he hath not seen me. For it is written concerning me thus: ‘they that have seen me believed not on me, but they that have not seen me shall believe and live.’ And concerning that which thou hast written unto me to come down unto thee, it is needful that I fulfill all that for which I was sent; and when I have fulfilled it I will ascend unto Him that sent me. And after my ascension I will send one of my disciples, who shall heal thee of thy disease, and give life unto thee and unto all that are with thee.”18

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.19Concerning the recognition of the traditionof 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.

Section 3. Legends of Rhipsime and GregoryThese traditions have their historical setting in the reign of Tiridates, and of Chosroes the father of Tiridates.21Just 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, calledArdavan, who was overthrown (A.D. 227) by a Persian prince of the province of Fars, named Ardashir.22His 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.23The 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.24Ardashir 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.25Having 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 theArmenian 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.26For 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.27While 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.28Rhipsime, 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 girlsucceeded 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 hisHistoire du Règne de Tiridatebut unfortunately the book has been tampered with and now contains much questionable material.29There 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.30He 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 placehuge 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.31Such 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.32Gregory, 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.33Armenia, 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.34The 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 laterthan 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.

Section 3. Legends of Rhipsime and Gregory

These traditions have their historical setting in the reign of Tiridates, and of Chosroes the father of Tiridates.21Just 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, calledArdavan, who was overthrown (A.D. 227) by a Persian prince of the province of Fars, named Ardashir.22His 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.23The 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.24Ardashir 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.25Having 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 theArmenian 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.26For 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.27While 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.28Rhipsime, 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 girlsucceeded 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 hisHistoire du Règne de Tiridatebut unfortunately the book has been tampered with and now contains much questionable material.29There 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.30He 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 placehuge 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.31Such 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.32Gregory, 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.33Armenia, 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.34The 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 laterthan 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.

These traditions have their historical setting in the reign of Tiridates, and of Chosroes the father of Tiridates.21Just 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, calledArdavan, who was overthrown (A.D. 227) by a Persian prince of the province of Fars, named Ardashir.22His 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.23The 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.25Having 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 theArmenian 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.28Rhipsime, 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 girlsucceeded 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 hisHistoire du Règne de Tiridatebut unfortunately the book has been tampered with and now contains much questionable material.29There 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.30He 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 placehuge 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.32Gregory, 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.33Armenia, 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.34The 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 laterthan 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.

Section 4. The Armenian Church as a Social ForceThe 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;35as 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.37First, 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 thespirit of the teachings of Jesus as any Christian sect that ever existed.38But 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.”39What 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.40The 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, ofNane, and of Anahit, many of which were defended by the vanquished until overpowered.41Shrines 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.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.42A 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.”43A 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.”44Already, 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),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.45The 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.”46The “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.

Section 4. The Armenian Church as a Social Force

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;35as 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.37First, 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 thespirit of the teachings of Jesus as any Christian sect that ever existed.38But 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.”39What 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.40The 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, ofNane, and of Anahit, many of which were defended by the vanquished until overpowered.41Shrines 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.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.42A 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.”43A 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.”44Already, 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),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.45The 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.”46The “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.

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;35as 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 thespirit of the teachings of Jesus as any Christian sect that ever existed.38But 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.”39What 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.40The 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, ofNane, and of Anahit, many of which were defended by the vanquished until overpowered.41Shrines 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.

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.42A 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.”43A 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),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.45The 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.”46The “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.

1Clark,New Englander22:507, 672. Raffi p. 127.2That trees are worshipped even to-day, and that certain superstitions are bound up with them is clearly shown by Abeghian. “In den Gegenden Armeniens, wo das Land mit Wäldern bedeckt ist, werden viele sehr alte und grosse Bäume für heilig gehalten und ähnlicher Weise wie die Quellen verehrt. Man brennt vor ihnen Lichter. Weihrauch, opfert ihnen Hähne und Hammel, küsst sie, kriecht durch ihren gespaltenen Stamm durch, oder lässt magere Kinder durch ihre Löcher schlüpfen, um die Einwirkung der bosen Geister aufzuheben. Man glaubt dass vom Himmel Lichter auf die heiligen Bäume kommen, oder Heilige sich auf denselben aufhalten. Auch die Bäume geben Gesundheit, einige heilen alle Krankheiten.... Um von Bäumen Heilung zu bekommen soll man ein Stück von seiner Kleidung abreissen und damit den Baum umwickeln oder es auf den Baum nageln. Man glaubt dadurch seine Krankheit auf den Baum zu übertragen.” Abeghian pp. 58, 59.3Agathangelus p. 127. Emin,Recherches sur le Paganisme Arménienp. 9.4Raffi, article in Boyadjian’sArmenian Legends and Poetry.5Tir is mentioned only once by Agathangelus (p. 164) and he is not mentioned by any other Armenian writers (Langlois 1:164). Emin compares him to the Greek Hermes or Mercury, probably because Agathangelus speaks of him as the recorder or reporter of Aramazd. (Emin p. 20, note 1.)6Abeghian p. 4.7He corresponds to the Persian Mithra and is hence of Persian origin and not Greek. The Greek translation of Agathangelus regards him asanalogousto Vulcan, which Emin considers to be incorrect. (Agathangelus p. 168; Emin p. 20.)8Raffi, article in Boyadjian’sArmenian Legends and Poetry.Seklemian’sTales. Preface by Blackwell.9“Und auch heute pflegt man stellenweise niederzuknieen und zu beten: ‘O du göttliche strahlende Sonne! Dein Fuss ruhe auf meinem Antlitz! Bewahre meine Kinder.’” u. s. w. Abeghian p. 43.10Although the Greeks have identified Anahit with their goddess of chastity, Artemid, the Armenian goddess is not of Greek, but of Assyro-Babylonian origin according to Emin. Her name “Anahato” in ancient Persian means “Spotless.” Agathangelus p. 126; Emin p. 10.11Agathangelus. Langlois 1:127.12Raffi p. 129.Both Nane and Astghik are mentioned by Agathangelus who speaks of the latter as the Aphrodite of the Greeks. (Agathangelus p. 173.) Emin likens Nane to Venus. The fact is that very little is known of either. (Agathangelus p. 168; Emin, p. 16.)13St. Martin 1:305, 306.14In the reigns of Artasches I and Tigranes II, many Greek statues were imported from abroad, and the latter king not only constructed temples for the worship of Greek divinities, but also ordered all to offer sacrifices and to worship newly acquired gods and goddesses. (Moses of Khorene pp. 86–88.)15St. Martin 1:295.16Moses of Khorene p. 95.17Moses of Khorene p. 96.18Ibid.19Ormanian p. 3.20There is another legend of St. Thaddeus, according to which he converted Abgar and his whole court to Christianity, curing the king of his disease at the same time. (Moses p. 97.) Abgar, who died shortly afterword, divided his kingdom between his son and nephew. The former at once resumed the pagan worship while the latter was forced to apostatize. But the preaching and martyrdom of St. Thaddeus at the hand of Sanatruk, the nephew, is recorded by Faustus of Byzantium, one of the most reliable of early Armenian historians. (Faustus of Byzantium. Langlois 1:210. See also Lynch,Armenia1:278, and Moses of Khorene pp. 98–99.)21Lynch 1:286.22St. Martin pp. 302, 303.23Agathangelus. Langlois 1:115.24St. Martin p. 303.Agathangelus p. 122.25St. Martin p. 304. Agathangelus p. 121.26Agathangelus pp. 126–33.27Ibid.p. 135.28Lynch 1:256. Agathangelus p. 139.29Critics have distinguished Agathangelus, the historian, from Pseudo Agathangelus, the meddler, who evidently had religious interests at stake. The former lived in the fourth century, and was secretary to Tiridates, who unquestionably commissioned him to keep the records of the events of his reign. He is spoken of by Moses and other ancient historians as sincere and reliable. It is thus assumed that the original work has been destroyed or lost, and that the Greek and Armenian texts now existing are the work of an interpolater who desired to weave the straggling skeins of religious sentiment into a single garment by establishing an historic and literary sanction to the religious events of the period of the conversion. There are many indications of this, chief of which is the highly imaginative style of narrative, undoubtedly designed with the particular intent of capturing the minds of the people. (Langlois’ introduction to Agathangelus 1:99–108.)30Langlois in his footnotes states that the chapel consecrated to St. Gaiane was constructed by the Katholikos Ezdras in the year 630. and repaired in 1652. The church of St. Rhipsime was built by the Katholikos Gomidas in 618, and repaired in 1653. The main cathedral was built by St. Gregory. They are situated in Etchmiadzin. (Dubois 3:213. Langlois 1:160, 162.)31Lynch 1:291, note.32Dubois 3:276.33Bryce pp. 314, 315.34Ormanian p. 13.35Dubois 3:276.36Ormanian p. 8.37Agathangelus pp. 164–66.38See Conybeare’s translation and annotation of theKey of Truth, the book of the Paulicians (Adoptionists) of Thonrak. This book contains the baptismal and ordinal service of the Adoptionist church. (Especially pp. vi–xcxii.)39Conybeare p. xcvii. The original is given by Conybeare as follows: “Dic mihi,” says Archelaus, “super quem Spiritus Sanctus sicut columba descendit. Quis est etiam qui baptizatur a Ioanne si perfectus erat, si Filius erat, si vertus erat, non poterat Spiritus ingredi; sicut nee regnum potest ingredi intra regnum.”Lynch 1:279.40Ibid.1:282.41Lynch 1:294.Agathangelus pp. 164–66.42St. Martin 1: appendix.Elisée Vartabed,Histoire de Vartan. Langlois 2:190–91.43Ibid.p. 195.44Lidgett,An Ancient People.The detailed events of this struggle against the Persians are told in theHistoire de Vartan et de la Guerre des Arméniens, by Elisée Vartabed who belonged to the second order of translators and served under General Vartan during the war, the history of which he narrates.After the sad ending of the series of dramatic incidents that made up this struggle for religious freedom, Elisée sought solitude and lived on herbs and roots in a mountainside cave which came to be known as the “cave of Elisée.” Because of a growing social intimacy he was obliged to find a second cave in a more remote section of the country, where he completed his work and died. His history is written in the style of a religious mystic, is full of dramatic imagery, and has come down as an Armenian classic. (Langlois 2:179–82.)45Lynch 1:313.Ormanian p. 35.46Ibid.p. 36.

1Clark,New Englander22:507, 672. Raffi p. 127.

2That trees are worshipped even to-day, and that certain superstitions are bound up with them is clearly shown by Abeghian. “In den Gegenden Armeniens, wo das Land mit Wäldern bedeckt ist, werden viele sehr alte und grosse Bäume für heilig gehalten und ähnlicher Weise wie die Quellen verehrt. Man brennt vor ihnen Lichter. Weihrauch, opfert ihnen Hähne und Hammel, küsst sie, kriecht durch ihren gespaltenen Stamm durch, oder lässt magere Kinder durch ihre Löcher schlüpfen, um die Einwirkung der bosen Geister aufzuheben. Man glaubt dass vom Himmel Lichter auf die heiligen Bäume kommen, oder Heilige sich auf denselben aufhalten. Auch die Bäume geben Gesundheit, einige heilen alle Krankheiten.... Um von Bäumen Heilung zu bekommen soll man ein Stück von seiner Kleidung abreissen und damit den Baum umwickeln oder es auf den Baum nageln. Man glaubt dadurch seine Krankheit auf den Baum zu übertragen.” Abeghian pp. 58, 59.

3Agathangelus p. 127. Emin,Recherches sur le Paganisme Arménienp. 9.

4Raffi, article in Boyadjian’sArmenian Legends and Poetry.

5Tir is mentioned only once by Agathangelus (p. 164) and he is not mentioned by any other Armenian writers (Langlois 1:164). Emin compares him to the Greek Hermes or Mercury, probably because Agathangelus speaks of him as the recorder or reporter of Aramazd. (Emin p. 20, note 1.)

6Abeghian p. 4.

7He corresponds to the Persian Mithra and is hence of Persian origin and not Greek. The Greek translation of Agathangelus regards him asanalogousto Vulcan, which Emin considers to be incorrect. (Agathangelus p. 168; Emin p. 20.)

8Raffi, article in Boyadjian’sArmenian Legends and Poetry.

Seklemian’sTales. Preface by Blackwell.

9“Und auch heute pflegt man stellenweise niederzuknieen und zu beten: ‘O du göttliche strahlende Sonne! Dein Fuss ruhe auf meinem Antlitz! Bewahre meine Kinder.’” u. s. w. Abeghian p. 43.

10Although the Greeks have identified Anahit with their goddess of chastity, Artemid, the Armenian goddess is not of Greek, but of Assyro-Babylonian origin according to Emin. Her name “Anahato” in ancient Persian means “Spotless.” Agathangelus p. 126; Emin p. 10.

11Agathangelus. Langlois 1:127.

12Raffi p. 129.

Both Nane and Astghik are mentioned by Agathangelus who speaks of the latter as the Aphrodite of the Greeks. (Agathangelus p. 173.) Emin likens Nane to Venus. The fact is that very little is known of either. (Agathangelus p. 168; Emin, p. 16.)

13St. Martin 1:305, 306.

14In the reigns of Artasches I and Tigranes II, many Greek statues were imported from abroad, and the latter king not only constructed temples for the worship of Greek divinities, but also ordered all to offer sacrifices and to worship newly acquired gods and goddesses. (Moses of Khorene pp. 86–88.)

15St. Martin 1:295.

16Moses of Khorene p. 95.

17Moses of Khorene p. 96.

18Ibid.

19Ormanian p. 3.

20There is another legend of St. Thaddeus, according to which he converted Abgar and his whole court to Christianity, curing the king of his disease at the same time. (Moses p. 97.) Abgar, who died shortly afterword, divided his kingdom between his son and nephew. The former at once resumed the pagan worship while the latter was forced to apostatize. But the preaching and martyrdom of St. Thaddeus at the hand of Sanatruk, the nephew, is recorded by Faustus of Byzantium, one of the most reliable of early Armenian historians. (Faustus of Byzantium. Langlois 1:210. See also Lynch,Armenia1:278, and Moses of Khorene pp. 98–99.)

21Lynch 1:286.

22St. Martin pp. 302, 303.

23Agathangelus. Langlois 1:115.

24St. Martin p. 303.

Agathangelus p. 122.

25St. Martin p. 304. Agathangelus p. 121.

26Agathangelus pp. 126–33.

27Ibid.p. 135.

28Lynch 1:256. Agathangelus p. 139.

29Critics have distinguished Agathangelus, the historian, from Pseudo Agathangelus, the meddler, who evidently had religious interests at stake. The former lived in the fourth century, and was secretary to Tiridates, who unquestionably commissioned him to keep the records of the events of his reign. He is spoken of by Moses and other ancient historians as sincere and reliable. It is thus assumed that the original work has been destroyed or lost, and that the Greek and Armenian texts now existing are the work of an interpolater who desired to weave the straggling skeins of religious sentiment into a single garment by establishing an historic and literary sanction to the religious events of the period of the conversion. There are many indications of this, chief of which is the highly imaginative style of narrative, undoubtedly designed with the particular intent of capturing the minds of the people. (Langlois’ introduction to Agathangelus 1:99–108.)

30Langlois in his footnotes states that the chapel consecrated to St. Gaiane was constructed by the Katholikos Ezdras in the year 630. and repaired in 1652. The church of St. Rhipsime was built by the Katholikos Gomidas in 618, and repaired in 1653. The main cathedral was built by St. Gregory. They are situated in Etchmiadzin. (Dubois 3:213. Langlois 1:160, 162.)

31Lynch 1:291, note.

32Dubois 3:276.

33Bryce pp. 314, 315.

34Ormanian p. 13.

35Dubois 3:276.

36Ormanian p. 8.

37Agathangelus pp. 164–66.

38See Conybeare’s translation and annotation of theKey of Truth, the book of the Paulicians (Adoptionists) of Thonrak. This book contains the baptismal and ordinal service of the Adoptionist church. (Especially pp. vi–xcxii.)

39Conybeare p. xcvii. The original is given by Conybeare as follows: “Dic mihi,” says Archelaus, “super quem Spiritus Sanctus sicut columba descendit. Quis est etiam qui baptizatur a Ioanne si perfectus erat, si Filius erat, si vertus erat, non poterat Spiritus ingredi; sicut nee regnum potest ingredi intra regnum.”

Lynch 1:279.

40Ibid.1:282.

41Lynch 1:294.

Agathangelus pp. 164–66.

42St. Martin 1: appendix.

Elisée Vartabed,Histoire de Vartan. Langlois 2:190–91.

43Ibid.p. 195.

44Lidgett,An Ancient People.

The detailed events of this struggle against the Persians are told in theHistoire de Vartan et de la Guerre des Arméniens, by Elisée Vartabed who belonged to the second order of translators and served under General Vartan during the war, the history of which he narrates.After the sad ending of the series of dramatic incidents that made up this struggle for religious freedom, Elisée sought solitude and lived on herbs and roots in a mountainside cave which came to be known as the “cave of Elisée.” Because of a growing social intimacy he was obliged to find a second cave in a more remote section of the country, where he completed his work and died. His history is written in the style of a religious mystic, is full of dramatic imagery, and has come down as an Armenian classic. (Langlois 2:179–82.)

45Lynch 1:313.

Ormanian p. 35.

46Ibid.p. 36.

Back to IndexNext