Armenian Medieval Historians in Print Three Centuries of Scholarship across Three Continents1 BY DR. ARA SANJIAN, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN-DEARBORN written overwhelmingly in Classical Armenian (grabar), and their more recent translations into both the Eastern and Western branches of the modern Armenian literary language (ashkharhabar).2 It thus provides one important indicator to how akob Meghapart’s pioneering the locus of Armenian Studies research effort exactly five centuries ago activities shifted across a number of cities this year has made it inconceiv- and institutions situated on three conti- able ever since to analyze and nents over the last 300 years. At the same Hevaluate the worldwide dissemination of time, it will be this author’s humble tribute Armenian culture bypassing the medium to all the prominent scholars whose efforts of printing—both books and periodicals. made medieval Armenian histories acces- For a people with a long diasporic tradition sible to their peers and lay readers inter- and, until 1918, without a state of their own, ested in the Armenian past. printing technology made it easier for This article covers the works of those Armenian authors and their readers to Prof. Manuk Abeghian 37 Armenian authors, who were treated establish and maintain their own worldwide in a separate chapter each in Levon network of printing, distribution, reading and exchanging ideas. Hovhannes Babayan’s trilogy on Armenian historiography, arguably This study focuses on one particular facet of the history of the most comprehensive study in this domain to date.3 To make Armenian printing: the editing and publication of the works of it easier both for the reader to follow the chronological structure Armenian medieval historians who lived in the 5th–18th centuries. of this article and for the author to make comparisons and gen- It analyzes the patterns of publication of both their original texts, eralizations, a number of ground rules were followed during the September 1, 2012 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 13 presentation of the compiled data. First, Cover page of the 1669 the works of Tovma Artzruni and Amsterdam edition of Arakel Davizhetsi's History (digitized Matteos Urhayetsi are considered as a by the National Library of single unit each; their continuators Armenia) are not accorded individualized treat- ment. Secondly, if the same work has been published at different times contains numerous gram- under the name of different authors, matical errors. Moreover, he all of its editions are listed here under omitted certain sections, the author, who is now accorded the combined or rephrased oth- widest acceptance.4 Thirdly, only the ers, and made stylistic works of history of these 37 authors changes to bring Davrizhetsi’s are covered.5 Finally, if an author has style into conformity with produced more than one work of grabar. All these would neces- historical nature, only his major sitate the preparation of a crit- work is considered.6 Thus all but ical edition of Davrizhetsi three one of the 37 authors covered do centuries later. appear in this article with only The choice of the next one work, that which is generally Armenian medieval historian considered as their magnum to go into print appears more opus in history.7 logical. For centuries, Movses Khorenatsi had been consid- ‘GRABAR’ EDITIONS ered as the Father of Armenian History. The Geography attrib- edieval Armenian uted to him had already had two historiography editions when the editio prin- flourished not long after the ceps 9 of his History was printed creation of the Armenian alphabet in the 5th cen- in 1695, again in Amster dam, but Mtury. In contrast, publishing works of history was not foremost by Bishop Tovmas Nurijanian, a member of the Vanandetsi family in the minds of the first Armenian printers after 1512. It took of printers, who published over 20 Armenian-language books in exactly 157 years—until 1669—to see the first work of history the Dutch capital in 1685–1717. Khorenatsi’s first edition was printed in Armenian. By then, 70 titles in Armenian had already based only on a single manuscript, which was full of errors. seen the light. Nevertheless, it helped bring the work to the attention of western The first printed Armenian history was that of Arakel scholars and was reprinted in Venice in 1752. Davrizhetsi, published by Archbishop Voskan Yerevantsi in After a couple of short-lived attempts in 1567–69 and 1677–78, Amsterdam. Most of the earliest Armenian language printing had Armenian printing was established in Constantinople on a more been carried out in Italy. However, from 1660, Armenian printers regular footing at the end of the 17th century. For the next 100 had become attracted to the Dutch capital, considered then to years or so, the Ottoman capital consistently remained the city be the world’s wealthiest city. Printing standards had dropped in where the largest number of Armenian books was published. Italy during the 17th century and, perhaps more importantly, the Among these Constantinople publications were the next four largely Protestant Dutch Republic was renowned for its relative editiones principes of medieval Armenian historians: Grigor religious tolerance. Roman Catholic censors could not hamper Marzvantesi printed Agatangeghos (1709–10) and Hovhannes the work of Armenian printers there. Voskan, often considered Mamikonian (1719); Martiros Sargsian, Pavstos Buzand (1730); as the second most important early Armenian printer after and Hovhannes Astvatzatrian, Yeghishe (1764). This was an era Meghapart, arrived in Amsterdam in 1664 and printed 15 where the tasks of choosing the manuscript and editing it for Armenian-language books during his five-year stay. Foremost publication were not yet separate from the technical process of among his Amsterdam publications was, of course, the first full printing. Therefore, the owners of the printing presses are also edition of the Armenian Bible in 1666–68. acknowledged as the publishers of the respective works, although Davrizhetsi’s History printed by Voskan is significant because they usually had a number of associates, from those who provided it was published during the author’s lifetime.8 The circumstances the manuscript and/or supervised the process of copy-editing that pushed Voskan to print Davrizhetsi’s work remain unclear. and proofreading to those who covered the printing expenses. The author had completed his manuscript in 1662 and had already When the Mkhitarist Father Mikayel Chamchian compiled in ordered a number of hand-copies to be made, probably to guar- the 1780’s his monumental, three-volume History of the Armenians, antee the work’s preservation in the future. Voskan’s print version the most ambitious such project since Khorenatsi and the first 14 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | September 1, 2012 comprehensive Armenian history in the 18th century, it was still in the modern times, only five medieval process of acquiring manuscripts to Armenian histories were in print. build up the rich library of over 4,000 Chamchian mentions twelve other Armenian manuscripts it now has on authors included in this survey, the isle of San Lazzaro. Indeed, the whose works he probably consulted compilation of Chamchian’s History in manuscript form. Indeed, he con- provided an important catalyst to tinued to receive new manuscripts as that process. The History of Ghazar writing was in progress. He also indi- Parpetsi, which had been discovered cates awareness of the existence of in a monastery in Taron in 1782 and other medieval historians, whose immediately sent to Venice, was works he did not have at his disposal. eventually published in 1793. Among them, Ukhtanes, Sebeos, However, it was only after 1826 that Ghevond, and Movses Kaghankatvatsi the Mkhitarists began publishing would be discovered and published in medieval Armenian literature, includ- course of the next century. ing histories, in a consistent manner. The works of eleven historians ndeed, by 1915, all but three of included in this survey eventually the authors surveyed for this arti- came out in two parallel and long- cle were already in print, and lasting series: Entir matenagirk many of them had had multi- (Outstanding Medieval Authors) and Iple—a few, even critical—editions. Matenagrutiunk nakhniats (Ancient These new editions came out in over Writings). Among them, Khorenatsi a dozen different cities across the and Yeghishe were printed in both Ottoman and the Russian empires, but series. However, there were only two also in Western Europe and even the editiones principes: Koriun and British colony of India. These cities Aristakes Lastivertsi. Instead, the were either centers of Armenian Mkhitarists of Venice played a pivotal monastic communities, both Apostolic role in disseminating on a wider scale and Roman Catholic (Venice, Vienna, works, which had been published ear- Vagharshapat, and Jerusalem), or lier, but mostly as poor editions and towns hosting vibrant Armenian com- with limited printruns. Altogether, munities (Constantinople, Smyrna, between 1827 and 1914, they printed Moscow, St. Petersburg, Feodosiya, Yeghishe nine times; Khorenatsi, six; Shushi, Tiflis, and Calcutta). Paris, Cover page of the first edition of Khorenatsi (Amsterdam, Pavstos and Koriun, three each; meanwhile, appears on this list solely 1695)—source: Hay girke 1512–1800 tvakannerin, p. 116 Agatangeghos, Parpetsi, Hovhannes because of the single-handed efforts Mamikonian, and Lastivertsi, twice of Father Karapet Shahnazariants (1814–65), who set up a printing each; and, finally, Vardan Areveltsi and Kirakos Gandzaketsi, once press in the French capital in the second half of the 1850’s and each. These editions enjoyed the advantage of having been based published the series Shar hay patmagrats (Armenian Historians’ on comparing larger number of manuscripts than the earlier edi- Series), including the editiones principes of Ghevond, Stepanos tions of the same authors. Taronetsi Asoghik, Stepanos Orbelian, Kaghankatvatsi, and Tovma In 1773, some Mkhitarist monks broke away from the con- Metzopetsi.