In chapter 7 of his classic Documents
pour l'etude du livre d'Agathange, Garitte compared Vg with
the other recensions. He concluded that (1) in general, the Armeno-Greek
Agat'angeghos and the Graeco-Arabic Life of St. Gregory
are parallel despite the different ordering of events and the
absence or presence of episodes from one or the other (40); (2)
each recension, except Va, has an element peculiar to itself
whether this be the Teaching of St. Gregory in Aa, the revolt
of Artasir in Ag, or Vg's story of Gregory's wife (41); (3)
Vg is not a translation of Aa but an entirely different version
(42); (4) Va is a concoction of an unabridged recension of Vg
and a text resembling Aa (43).
Thus there are not one but several accounts
of the conversion of Armenia, written, compiled, and translated
at different times. Nor is one dealing with an independently written
narration, the work of one man's genius. As Abeghyan pointed out
long ago, in the Armenian Agat'angeghos alone the influences of
Irano-Armenian folk tales and Syrian martyrologies are observed
(44). The presence of numerous lengthy borrowings from Koriwn's
place the compilation of Aa (from which Ag and parts of Va) after
443-450. However, the fact that the story of Armenia's conversion
contains passages which date from the mid-fifth century does
not necessarily mean that "Agat'angeghos" describes
a fifth century reality. Toumanoff observed that the definitely
fifth century list of princes which Adontz drew up based on P'arpec'i
differs from the one list found in all four versions of ''Agat'angelos".
Nine princes appear in the latter list but are absent from
P'arpec'i. The regions represented by many of the princes were
part of an Armenian state in the fourth, but not in the fifth
century. Therefore Toumanoff believes that the historical situation
found in the two recensions reflects one contemporaneous with
Armenia's conversion (46).
Concerning the Mamikonean family and
the sparapetut'iwn, there is disagreement among
the versions. There are three lists in "Agat'angeghos"
which mention the sparapet: (1) The princes
accompanying St. Gregory to Caesarea for ordination: Aa (Venice,
1930). Mentioned fifth in this list is "prince of the sparapetut'iwn.
general of Armenia'' (47); Aa (Tiflis, 1909, critical edition)
the sparapet in command of the expedition is named
Artawazd (48); Ag calls this officer the stratopedarch
(49); Va as well as Vgs (50) employs a surname and gives
an expanded statement:
Quintus princeps mqwuyn'nwn nomine 'sb'r'b'ts: hic autem praefectus erat exercitui totius Armeniae, equitum et peditum, nec discedebat a rege magnae Armeniae, atque in bellis omnes quos memorabimus principes et memorabimus, sub eius potestate erant, praeterquam quod princeps qmrdl non erat sub eius potestale, quae (regio) est iuxta fortes qrdytn (51).
Vg and Va subsequently mention Artawazd
"prince of the Mamikonean and asparapet" (52);
(2) The three envoys sent to Caesarea by Trdat III
to fetch Gregory's sons: Aa and Ag record "prince Artawazd,
generalissimo of all the armies of Greater Armenia" as the
first envoy (53); Vg does not mention the name of any of the
ambassadors; Va has "primus princeps 'rtw'zd'
(Artawazd) qui praefectus erat patnciorum super totam regionem
Armeniae" (54); (3) The princes accompanying
Trdat III to Rome: Aa, "the great sparapet'"
(unnamed) is recorded after Trdat's four border-lords, the
prince of Angegh district and the coronant (55); Ag has "the
great stratopedarch" (56) Va and Vg do not
contain this passage.
While all versions mention a sparapet
during the reign of Trdat III, this officer's first and last
names are found together only in Va and Vg. This circumstance
did not escape Movses Xorenac'i, the author of an anti-Mamikonean
History of Armenia. For Movses, the sparapet
under Trdat was also an Artawazd, but Artawazd Mandakuni,
not Mamikonean (57). The fifth century History of
P'awstos Buzand, however, confirms Artawazd Mamikonean as Trdat's
sparapet. In IIl.2, P'awstos calls Vach'e Mamikonean
(sparapet of King Xosrov Kotak) "the
son of Artawazd." Presumably, just as Xosrov succeeded his
father Trdat as king, so Vach'e succeeded his father Artawazd
as sparapet.
The sparapet is not an
important figure in "Agat'angeghos". Ordinarily
the armies appear to be under the direct control of the monarch,
a circumstance which heightens the epic grandeur of the tale.
Thus King Xosrov "assembled the multitude of soldiers and
all who had arrived from different parts to aid him in war"
58. The king divided his army into cohorts (59); he raided Assyria
(60). A Christian, "the king and all the army" destroyed
pagan temples (61). The king himself paid and dismissed his troops
(62). All military affairs are in the hands of the king. The
king summons his army, or the king, his sister, and the queen
summon the army (63), or even St. Gregory calls the cohorts together
for baptism (64). But the sparapet,though he is
mentioned three times, has little to do with the army in this
story.
Return to Selected Writings Menu