The Arshakunis: The legend of king Arshak – 4/7 –

Read the attached translated story and derive your own conclusion from the legend of King Arshak II (350-367 CE) as depicted in the Simon Simonian’s history book, lesson 8^th fifth grade elementary Armenian school students. Note Simon Simonian narrated the legend depicting the Armenian Arshakuni king as Arshak I, (Ե. Սարի, Ը. Դաս, Արշակ Ա.). Simon Simonian has presented the story noting that «this story tells us about the appeal of the Armenian soil and water.» Lately, decades after having read the story during my impressional childhood, the same story has been popping in my mind for another reason and that is the dichotomy the Armenians display in the Diaspora as a exemplary citizens and as Armenian press pundits, but not in Armenia or for matters pertaining to Armenia hurling adjectives to the Armenian elected officials the same pundits never did and would not do when writing about the elected officials of their Diaspora countries. The following picture emerges in my mind. Armenians presenting themseleves in the best manner, tidying their home to recieve and entertain their odar  guests, but not according the same to their country Armenia and to their countrymen, Armenians. I thank Sassoun Simonian from Lebanon and Levon Sharoyan from Aleppo for forwarding me copies from Simon Simonian's history book. Read the story and derive your own conclusion from the legend whether we are affected by a King Arshag Syndrome.  Vahe H Apelian

The cover of the Simon Simonian's history book

“The Persian king Shapur (Shabouh in Armenian), called his shamans and told them – “I wanted to love the Armenian king Arshak, but he offended me. I signed a peace treaty with him, he swore on the bible, but reneged his solemn declaration. I thought of bestowing upon him much good, much like a father would do to his son. However, instead of reciprocating in kind, he was spiteful towards me. The Armenian king Arshak has been waging war against me for the past thirty months. We could never defeat him. He has come with his own accord. If I knew that he would remain loyal to our treaty, I will let him return to his country in peace and with honor.”

His shamans answered to king Shabouh – “let us go today, tomorrow we will have an answer for you.”

The following day the shamans got together and asked the monarch – “now that the Armenian king has come and is with you, how does he talk to you? How does he sound? How does he present himself to you?”

The monarch said – “he regards himself as one of my servants and he tries to humble himself before me.”

The shamans said – “Do whichever way we tell you to do. Keep him here. Send emissaries to the Armenian land and get from there two loads of soil and a jar of water.  Order that they spread the Armenian soil on half of your court. Hold his hands and walk with him on part of the court that is on the Persian soil and quiz him there. Later on, holding his hand, take him towards the court that is on the Armenian soil and pay attention to what he says. This way you will know if you let him loose, whether he will abide by your treaty or not. If he speaks defiantly on the Armenian soil, know that when he returns to Armenia, he will treat you likewise. He will continue the war and his enmity towards you.”

Upon hearing the recommendations of his shamans, the Persian king sent people to Armenia to bring Armenian soil and water loaded on camels. They returned after a few days and brought Armenian soil and water.  King Shabouh ordered to spread the Armenian soil under half of the court and sprinkle it with water from Armenia. He ordered that the other half of the court remain on Persian soil. King Shabouh summoned the Armenian king and had all others leave the court. He held king Arshak’s hand and continued pacing in the court.

Pacing in the court, Shabouh asked the Armenian king, when they were on the Persian soil: “why did you become my enemy, King Arshak of Armenians. I liked you as a son and I wanted to give my daughter to you in betrothal and have you as a son. But you became my enemy. It has been thirty months that you waged a war against me.”

Arshak said to Shabouh – “I sinned against you. Now, here I am as your servant and at the disposal of your hands Do, whatever you want to do. Kill me, because I, as your servant, am much guilty in front of you. I am convicted to death.”

Later, King Shabouh holding King Arskak’s hand, paced taking him along towards the Armenian soil all the while making amends. When Arshak stepped on the Armenian soild, he changed greatlhy and he became defiant, boastful and said – “Get away from me, you wicked master, you became an overlord. From now on, I will avenge you and your sons. I will not relent until our throne is given back to us.”

Shabouh again held Arshak’s hands and paced toward the court which was over the Persian soil. At that moment Arshak repented for what he said. Bowed and threw himself at the feet of King Shabouh. But when, holding King Arshak’s hands the Persian king paced towards the side of the court on the Armenian soil, Arskak spoke the same way he had spoken when he was on the Armenian soil. In this manner until the evening, Shabouh did the same many times and tested. King Arshak was rebellious on the Armenian soil but repentful on the Persian soil. 

Later in the day, King Shabouh ordered and had iron chains brought and had Arskak’s neck, arms and legs chained and had him sent to the Anhoush (forgotten) castle to remain there until his death.”

***

 

 

 

 

 

The Arshakunis: The pagan dynasty who embraced Christianity – 3/7 –

 No other Armenian kingdom has impacted in the shaping of the Armenian nation more than the Arshakunis, the Arsacid Dynasty (Արշակունիներ).  Who were the Arshakunis? This will me my third blog about this dynastic family and their converting  Armenia to a Christian nation state. . Vahe H Apelian

Arshakuni king Drtad III and St. Gregory the Illuminator 
at the entrance gate of Holy Etchmiadzin
Courtesy Lin Da.

High at the entrance of the Holy Etchmiadzin complex, a stone carving depicts King Drtad III and Gregoy the Illuminator as the founders of the Armenia’s state religion, Christianity. Between the two a sword like cross is placed, likely to symbolize the civic and eccclesiestical elements for the founding and preservation of Christianity as Armenia’s state religion. But King Drtad III’s ancestors were pagans, notably among them is the founder of the  Arshakuni Dynastry, Drtad I, who was a Zoroastrian.

This will be my third blog about the Arshakunis and it is a briefer rewording of my previous blog “From Garni to Etchmiadzin”.

Many of us has seen a picture of the temple of Garni in Armenia. Some of the readers of my blogs may have also visited the temple. They may have also asked. What on earth a Roman temple doing in Armenia?  Well, the temple is attributed to having been erected by the order of the first Arshakuni dynasty king Drtad I, who was crowed by the Emperor of Rome, Nero. King Drtad I was also a Zoroastrian high priest.

It makes sense that King Drtad I would have a pagan temple built in Armenia Both the Roman Empire and ancient Armenia worshiped their own pagan gods. But what does not make sense is the preservation of the Garni pagan temple because after his namesake King Drtad III, had the nation adopt Christianity as its religion, historian claimed that he had all the pagan temples destroyed. It appears that he had the temple at Garni, his Arshakuni dynasty’s first king King Drtad had erected, saved. That makes sense too. Does it not?  Yes, Drtad I and Drtad III were kings and ruled a vast country and adhered to different reglions, but they were family memebers as well. They were blood relatives. It is said that “blood is thicker than water.”

Left, pagan temple at Garni built by the order of king Drtad I.
 Right the Cathedral at Etchmiadzin built by the order of king Drtad III

I bet most of us know the fascinating tale of Drtad III’s converstion to Christianity and having the Armenian nation he ruled convert to Christianity. Anyone may resort to the internet and find much written about that historic happening. What followed, according to Catholicos Aram I, in his book titled “The Armenian Church”, was “The Christianization of Armenia and the Armenianization of the Christianity”. But I am not going to dwell in this blog about what historians have written, but what my mother and Sarkis Zeitlian said about King Drtad III forcing his nation to convert to Christianity. 

I will start with Unger Sarkis Zeitlian who was an ardent Armenian nationalist. Two personify Armenian nationalism for me, Sarkis Zeitlian whom I also knew personally and Karegin Njteh of whom I have read. Decades ago, during a lecture to the ARF Zavarian Student Association, reconciling the outward opposites of the ARF ideology - socialism and nationalism - Unger Sarkis Zeitlian said that it is the intense drive to carve their own place in their region and have their own culture in distinct to others in the region, were the motivations that drove Armenians from the get-go and that included accepting Christianity as a religion. In short, adopting Christianity was as much a testament of the Armenian nationalism, as finding resonance in the Christian faith.

In hindsight what Sarkis Zeitlian said makes sense. Armenia after all was the easternmost Roman dominion. It was Emperor Nero who had crowned king Drtad and had his dynastic kingdom established at the bottle neck of East and West. The Roman Empire worshiped its gods and persecuted Christians. It simply does not make  political sense for Drtad III,  the first king’s namesake, to anger the powerful Roman Empire and adopt Christianity as its state religion when its master Roman Empire not only had not, but also persecuted that religion.  Surely, the conversion was a signal to the Roman Empire, that its easternmost allied dominion, a country named Armenia, is not its vassal state. Of course, I am not ruling out the element of faith for the kingly conversion. All I am driving is that it is not reasonable to claim that it was only faith, against all earthly considerations, that drove King Drtad III to convert his subjects to Christianity that would not seat well with its powerful patron, the Roman Empire. It would take a dozen more years for Rome to accept Christianiry as its religion. 

The other plausible explanation for King Drtad III to have Armenia he ruled convert to Christianity, was offered to me by my mother who taught history to elementary and middle school students in the Armenian schools she taught. I have no recollection of Armenian history course being taught in Armenian HS. She said that the pagan priests had become immensely rich and the pagan temples possessed large tracts of lands. In short, the institution of the pagan worship had become so powerful that it undermined the Armenian King’s authority and wealth. By converting the nation to Christianity, King Drtad III with a master stroke pulled the carpet from the underneath pagan priests and instead of the pagan institution, had a new religion established whose head, he would appoint and would have him as a political ally as well. Of course, King Drtad III would have relied on popular support to venture into such a monumental change that would alter the course of the Armenian history. Surely he would have to grapple with resistance.  Gregory was a blue blood. He was the son of Parthian prince Annak who had killed the Armenian King Khosrov. In retaliation his father and the rest of the family were wiped out. But he was whisked away and brought up as a Christian. Even though his father had killed an Arshakuni king, by appointing Gregory as the head of the Christian religion he established, King Drtad III assured, or so he thought, that he established a heridatry ecclesiastical dynastly that would be an ally to his secular dynastry.  

But human nature in quest for territoriality appears never to be subjucated, even by religion. Converting the Armenian nation to Christianity and appointing its head, King Drtad III did not appear to erase church and the secular state conflict, about which later on.

Parallels Between Tbilisi and Yerevan Street Demonstrations

 I have attached my abridged translation of Avo G. Boghossian’s recent posting on his Facebook page (see below). I find his analysis of events dispassionate but principled. I have previously posted my translations of his other postings. I find a. parity of thought in his analysis and enjoy reading them. Vahe H Apelian 

 

Yerevan, China's Belt Way, Georgian Flag, Tbilisi, Armenian Flag 

A crisis, whose political consequences can be dire, is going on in Georgia for more than two weeks. Against the request of the ruling "Georgian Dream" party and the parliamentary majority in favor of the "foreign agent influence" law, president Salome Zurapishvili used her right of veto and joined the violent demonstrations organized by the opposition, which simply calls this law "a Russian law". With the ratification of that law, the creeping Russian influence on the country will increase significantly.

In the globalized system we live in, events that take place in any country will have varying degrees of effects on all the countries of the planet. Naturally, these effects will be consequential on the neighboring countries because of their economic interdependence, geopolitical orientation, and thus may threaten regional security and stability. Georgia is a neighboring country of Armenia. The increase of Russian influence in that country will have a direct reaction in our country. 

After the Russian adversarial role became evident during and in the aftermath of the Artsakh war of 2020, the Armenian authorities immediately took a geopolitical orientation towards West, deciding to undertake Armenia’s gradual diversification in almost all fields, such as education, economy,  armaments, for the sake of the security of the country. The tilting of the Armenia foreign policy towards West also coincided with the harsh policy West imposed upon Russia because of its war on Ukraine, resulting in the geopolitical competition between United States and Russia that gradually included the struggle to expand their sphere of influence over the South Caucasus. 

Russia's political abandonment of Armenia and the efforts of the West to penetrate into the Caucasus, presented a timely opportunity for our country to look Westward. It would have been a big political mistake not to tilt Westward underestimating the possible big security threats facing us. The Caucasus has been invaluable for Russia on its way to reach the warm waters. Russia, at the cost of violating its commitments to its ally Armenia, regained a better foothold through Azerbaijan by improving its relations with it and by becoming a decisive factor in Azerbaijan's successful initiative to recapture Artsakh. As a result of this Russian policy tilt, Armenia appeared completely unprotected in terms of its security and left in a very dangerous situation. In order to communicate with the outside world, we only have Georgia and Iran, which will provide us with the opportunity to reach out with the construction of the north-south road, or by a direct connection with the outside world. 

With Russia exerting its influence on Georgia, Russia not only hinders Georgia's connection to Europe, but also, first of all strengthens its control over the Chinese Belt and Road infrastructure initiative that reaches the port of Anaklia on the Black Sea, which is said to be the Black Sea port that could define Georgia’s geopolitical future. (Note: The Belt and Road Initiative, known in China as the One Belt One Road and sometimes referred to as the New Silk Road, is a global infrastructure development strategy adopted by the Chinese government in 2013 to invest in more than 150 countries and international organizations. Wikipedia).

 Through Azerbaijan to Georgia and also from Armenia, Russia takes possession of the trade communication with Europe and assumes the control of the South Caucasus by excreting its influence on the strategically, economically and geopolitically  important shortest route between India-Iran-Armenia-Georgia-Europe.

In view of the importance of taking over the mentioned routes, it becomes clearer that both the Georgian authorities and the opposition in Armenia, without taking into account the negative consequences for the security of the two countries, are trying to adopt the policies that protect and promote Russian interests. But the experiences the Armenians and Georgians in the Soviet era are still fresh in the collective consciousness of both Georgian and Armenian  peoples, make it difficult for them to want to return there. 

That is why in Georgia we see large popular demonstrations and manifestations of disobedience against the authorities, despite the fact that the mentioned bill may not have a direct visible effect on the economic situation of individual citizens alike.  In Armenia, despite the people's sometimes righteous dissatisfaction with the authorities, in the end we have not only lost Artsakh, but within sovereign and internationally recognized borders of Armenia, large masses of Armenian people do not participate in demonstrations and in acts of disobedience organized by the opposition. 

The opposition has failed to gain acceptance after many similar actions. After its repeated failures, the opposition’s reliance on a cleric for leadership, is already a sign of their desperation.

There is another phenomenon between the street demonstrations in Georgia and in Armenia, which is another indicator of the difference in the level of the alleged conviction of the participants to their cause. The combativeness of demonstrators in Georgia is very obvious. It becomes evident during the clashes with the Georgian police. The Georgian protesters are much more passionate We do not see the same manifestation in Armenia.  The inclusion of young participants in the street demonstration is Armenia is less than in the Georgian protesters, and are relatively more peaceful, less combative and determined, even to the point of being simple spectators.

What the outcome of the street actions taking place in the Georgia and Armenia will be, is difficult to guess. But one thing can be concluded for sure. The loss of the sovereign statehood is a probable ending.

***

Բնագիրը՝

Զուգահեռներ Թիֆլիսի եւ Երեւանի Փողոցներուն Միջեւ

Վրաստանի մէջ քաղաքական վտանգաւոր հետեւանքներով ճգնաժամը կը շարունակուի արդէն աւելի քան երկու շաբաթներէ ի վեր: Հակառակ “Վրացական երազանք” իշխող  կուսակցութեան եւ խորհրդարանական մեծամասնութեան խնդրայարոյց, “օտար գործակալներու ազդեցութեան” օրէնքին ի նպաստ քուվէարկութեան, գործող նախագահ Սալոմէ Զուրապիշվիլի վեթոյի իր իրավունքը օգտագործեց եւ միացաւ ընդդիմութեան կազմակերպած բուռն ցոյցերուն, որ սոյն օրէնքը պարզապէս կը կոչէ “ռուսական օրէնք”: Այդ օրէնքին վաւերականացմամբ Ռուսական սողոսկող ազդեցութիւնը զգալի չափով պիտի աւելնայ երկրին վրայ: 

Համաշխարհայնացած համակարգին ներքոյ, երբ որեւէ երկրի մէջ տեղի ունեցող դէպքերը տարբեր չափերու ազդեցութիւններ կ՛ունենան մոլորակի բոլոր երկիրներուն վրայ, բնականաբար այդ ազդեցութիւնները չափազանց մեծ կ՛ըլլան դէպքի վայրին հարեւան երկիրներուն վրայ, իբր հետեւանք անոնց տնտեսական փոխկապակցութեան,  աշխարհաքաղաքական ուղղուածութեան, պատերազմին, քաղաքական անկայունութեանը եւլն., որոնք կրնան սպառնալ տարածաշրջանային ապահովութեան եւ կայունութեան: 

Վրաստանը ըլլալով Հայաստանի հարեւան երկիր, ռուսական ազդեցութեան մեծացումը այդ երկրին մէջ ուղղակիօրէն իր արձագանքը պիտի ունենայ մեր երկրին մէջ: 2020-ի  Արցախեան պատերազմի ընթացքին բացայայտ դարձած ռուսական բացասական դերակատարութենէն ետք, Հայաստանի իշխանութիւնները ճարահատ, բռնեցին դէպի արեւմուտք աշխարհաքաղաքական ուղղութիւնը, երկրին անվտանգութեան համար որոշելով ձեռնարկել աստիճանական բազմազանացում ( diversification ) գրեթէ բոլոր ոլորտներուն մէջ ինչպէս՝ կրթական, տնտեսական, անվտանգութեան եւ սպառազինման: Սոյն արտաքին քաղաքականութեան դէպի արեւմուտք թէքումը կը համընկնէր նաեւ   ռուս-ուքրանական պատերազմին պատճառով արեւմուտքին կողմէ, Ռուսիոյ դէմ ի գործ դրուած կոշտ քաղաքականութեան, տնտեսական պատժամիջոցներուն, Ամերիկայի եւ Ռուսիոյ միջեւ աշխարհաքաղաքական մրցակցութեան, որ իր ծիրին մէջ հետզհետէ կը ներառէր նաեւ հարաւային Կովկասի վրայ ազդեցութեան գօտու տարածման պայքարը: 

Ռուսիոյ կողմէ Հայաստանի լքուած ըլլալու փաստը եւ արեւմուտքի դէպի կովկասեան տարածաշրջան ներթափանցումի ջանքերը ինչ խօսք որ, մեր երկրին համար դէպի արեւմտեան քաղաքակրթութիւն ուղղուելու պատեհ առիթ էր եւ անկաշկանդ զարգացման բաց պատուհան որուն, չընդառաջելը պիտի ըլլար քաղաքական մեծ սխալ, առանց թերագնահատելու մեր առջեւ պարզուող հաւանական անվտանգային մեծ սպառնալիքները: Կովկասը անգնահատելի արժէք եղած է Ռուսիոյ համար դէպի տաք ջուրեր հասնելու ճանապարհին, որ ան վերստին ձեռք բերած է Ատրպէյճանի տարածքով, անոր հետ իր յարաբերութիւնները բարելաւելով, ի գին Արցախի վերատիրացման Ատրպէյճանի նախաձեռնութեան մէջ գործոն դերակատարութեան եւ իր դաշնակից՝ Հայաստանի հանդէպ իր խօստացած պարտաւորութիւններուն դրժման: 

Ռուսական այս քաղաքականութեան հետեւանքով, Հայաստանը յայտնուած է բոլորովին անպաշտպան եւ անվտանգութեան առումով, խիստ վտանգաւոր կացութեան մը մէջ, իսկ արտաքին աշխարհին հետ հաղորդակցելու համար միայն ունենալով Վրաստանը եւ Իրանը որոնք մեզի կարելիութիւն կ՛ընձեռեն, հիւսիս-հարաւ ճանապարհի կառուցմամբ թէ՛ արտաքին աշխարհին հետ ուղղակի կապ հաստատելու, թէ տնտեսապէս եւ աշխարհաքաղաքականօրէն ռազմավարական կարեւորութիւն ստանալու Հնդկաստան-Իրան-Հայաստան-Վրաստան-Եւրոպա ամենակարճ ուղիի վրայ գտնուելով: 

Վրաստանի վրայ Ռուսիոյ ազդեցութեան վերադարձով, Ռուսիան ոչ միայն Վրաստանի դէպի Եւրոպա կապը կը խոչընդոտէ, այլ նաեւ առաջին հերթին Ատրպէյճանի վրայով դէպի վրացական՝ Չինաստանի նիւթական ներդրումներով արդիականացուած, Սեւ Ծովեան Անագլիա նաւահանգիստ հասնող չինական Belt and Road ենթակառուցուածքային նախաձեռնութեան վրայ վերահսկողութիւնը կ՛ամրացնէ, միեւնոյն ժամանակ Հայաստանէն անցնող հիւսիս-հարաւ ճանապարհով դէպի Եւրոպա բացուող վերոնշեալ ճանապարհին եւ մեր միակ բաց դռան կղպանքին կը տիրանայ, մեզ իրեն ենթակայ դարձնելով: Ռուսական այս քայլին յաջողութեան պարագային, Վրաստանը եւ Հայաստանը կորսնցնելով, արեւմուտքին հարաւային Կովկաս թափանցելու քայլերը կը ձախողին: 

Նշեալ երկու ճանապարհներուն տիրանալու կարեւորութեան ի տես, աւելի հասկնալի կը դառնայ թէ՛ Վրաստանի իշխանութեանց, թէ Հայաստանի ընդիմութեան ոգի ի բռին ջանքերը որդեգրելու ռուսական արեւելումի եւ ռուսական շահերը ապահովող քաղաքականութիւնները, առանց նկատի առնելու անոնց բացասական հետեւանքները զոյգ երկիրներուն անվտանգութեան: Բարեբախտաբար երկու ժողովուրդներուն  հաւաքական գիտակցութեան մէջ թարմ է խորհրդային ժամանակներու իրենց ապրած փորձառութիւնները եւ դժուար թէ ուզեն վերադառնալ հոն: Այդ պատճառով է որ Վրաստանի մէջ կը տեսնենք ժողովրդային մեծ ցոյցեր եւ անհնազանդութեան դրսեւորումներ, հակառակ որ նշեալ չարափաստիկ օրինագիծը անհատ քաղաքացիին տնտեսական վիճակին վրայ անմիջական տեսանելի ազդեցութիւն պիտի չունենայ, իսկ Հայաստանի մէջ, հակառակ ժողովուրդին իշխանութեանց նկատմամբ երբեմն արդար դժգոհութեանց՝ վերջապէս ոչ միայն Արցախն ենք կորսնցուցած այլ նոյնիքն Հայաստանի ինքնիշխան եւ միջազգայնօրէն ճանչցուած սահմաններէն ներս տարածքներ, ժողովրդային մեծ զանգուածներ չեն մասնակցիր ընդիմութեան կազմակերպած ցոյցերուն եւ անհնազանդութեան գործողութիւններուն: Ընդիմութեան բազմաթիւ նմանօրինակ գործողութիւններուն ձախողութենէն ետք ճարահատեալ, անոնց հոգեւորականի մը առաջնորդութեան ապաւինիլը արդէն փաստ է անոնց յուսահատութեան: 

Երկու երկիրներուն փողոցային գործողութիւններուն միջեւ կա՛յ այլ երեւոյթ մը, որ ցուցանիշ է անոնց մասնակիցներուն համոզուածութեան չափի տարբերութեան: Վրաստանի ցոյցերուն ընթացքին ակնյայտ է ժողովուրդին մարտական դրսեւորումը, որ ի յայտ կու գայ ոստիկանական ոյժերու հետ բախումներուն ընդմէջէն: Նոյն դրսեւորումը չենք տեսներ Հայաստանի մէջ: Հոս ցուցարարները շատ աւելի կրաւորական են, երիտասարդներուն ընդգրկուածութիւնը նուազ քան վրացի ցուցարարներունը, աւելի խաղաղ են, նուազ մարտական եւ վճռական, նոյնիսկ պարզ հանդիսատէսներ: 

Թէ ինչ վախճան կ՛ունենան զոյգ երկիրներուն մէջ տեղի ունեցող փողոցային գործողութիւնները, դժուար կռահելի է, սակայն մէկ բան յստակ կարելի է եզրակացնել: Պետութեանց կորուստը հաւանական վախճաններու շարքին է:

 

 

 

The Arshakunis: From Garni to Etchmiadzin – 2/7 –

 No other Armenian kingdom has impacted in the shaping of the Armenian nation more than the Arshakunis, the Arsacid Dynasty (Արշակունիներ).  Who were the Arshakunis? This will me my second blog about this dynastic family and their converting  Armenia to a Christian nation state.  Vahe H Apelian

 

LtoR: Garni Temple and Etchmiadzin Cathedral

Many of us has seen the temple of Garni in Armenia. Some of the readers of my blogs may have also visited the temple. They may have also asked. What on earth a Roman temple doing in Armenia?  Well, the temple is attributed to having been erected by the order of the first Arshakuni dynasty king Drtad I, who was crowed by the Emperor of Rome, Nero. It also turns out that King Drtad I was also a Zoroastrian high priest.

It makes sense, does it not? Burrowing from the title of one of Levon Shant’s works, “The Old Gods – Hin Astouatsner – Հին Աստուածներ», both the Roman Empire and ancient Armenia worshiped their own pagan gods. But what does not make sense is the preservation of the Garni pagan temple. After his namesake, King Drtad III had the nation adopt Christianity as its religion, historian claimed that he had all the pagan temples destroyed. It appears that he had the temple at Garni, the first king King Drtad had it erected, saved. That makes sense too. Does it not?  Yes,  Drtad I and Drtad III were kings and ruled a vast country but adhered to different reglions, but they were family members as well. Both were Arhakunis. They were blood relatives. It is said that “blood is thicker than water.”

I bet most of us know the fascinating tale of Drtad III’s conversion to Christianity and about Gregory held in the dungeon – Khor Virab; about the king Drtad III’s infatuation with young Roman Christian women who had found refuge in Armenia escaping persecution in Rome; about King’s sister Khosrovatought’s vision, the king’s order to have the Armenian nation adopt Christianity. Anyone interested may resort to the internet and find much written about that historic happening. But, I am not going to dwell in this blog about what historians have written, but what my mother and Sarkis Zeitlian said about King Drtad III forcing his nation to convert to Christianiy. 

King Dread III and Gregory the Illuminator at the Echmiadzin courtyard gate

I will start with Unger Sarkis Zeitlian who was an ardent Armenian nationalist. Two personify Armenian nationalism for me, Sarkis Zeitlian whom I also knew personally and Karegin Njteh of whom I have read. Decades ago, during a lecture to the ARF Zavarian Student Association, reconciling the outward opposites of the ARF ideology - socialism and nationalism - Unger Sarkis Zeitlian said that it is the intense drive to carve their own place in their region and have their own culture in distinct to others in the region, were the motivations that drove Armenians from the get-go and that included accepting Christianity as a religion. In short, adopting Christianity was as much a testament of the Armenian nationalism, as finding resonance in the Christian faith.

In hindsight what Sarkis Zeitlian said makes sense. Armenia after all was the easternmost Roman dominion. It was Emperor Nero who had crowned king Drtad and had his dynastic kingdom established at the bottle neck of East and West. The Roman Empire worshiped its gods and persecuted Christians. It simply does not make  political sense for Drtad III,  the first king’s namesake, to anger the powerful Roman Empire and adopt Christianity as its state religion when its master Roman Empire not only had not, but also persecuted that religion.  Surely, the conversion was a can be regarded a statement to the Roman Empire, that its easternmost allied dominion, a country named Armenia, is not its vassal state. Of course, I am not ruling out the element of faith for the kingly conversion. All I am driving is that it is not reasonable to claim that it was only faith, against all earthly considerations, that drove King Drtad III to convert his subjects to Christianity that would not seat well with its powerful patron, the Roman Empire. It would take a dozen more years for Rome to accept Christianiry as its religion. 

The other plausible explanation for King Drtad III to have Armenia he ruled convert to Christianity, was offered to me by my mother who taught history to elementary and middle school students in the Armenian schools she taught. I have no recollection of Armenian history course being taught in Armenian HS.  What we learned was the Armenian Cause, She said that the pagan priests had become immensely rich and were oppressing the people (կեղեքել is the word she used) and had them toll on the large tracts of lands the pagan temples possessed. In short, the institution of the pagan worship had become so powerful that it undermined the Armenian King’s authority and treasury. By converting the nation to Christianity, King Drtad III with a master stroke pulled the carpet from the underneath pagan priests and instead of the pagan institution, had a new religion established whose head, he would appoint and would have him as a political ally as well. Of course, King Drtad III would have relied on popular support to venture into such a monumental change that would alter the course of the Armenian history. Surely he would have to grapple with resistance. Gregory was a blue blood. He was the son of Parthian prince Annak who had killed the Armenian King Khosrov. In retaliation the Armenians had his father and the rest of the family wiped out. But he was whisked away and brought up as a Christian. Even though his father had killed an Arshakuni king, by appointing Gregory as the head of the Christian religion he established, King Drtad III assured, or so he thought, that he established a heridatry ecclesiastical dynasty that would be an ally to his secular dynastry.  

But human nature for territoriality, appears never to be subjucated, even by religion. Converting the Armenian nation to Christianity and appointing its head, King Drtad III did not appear to erase church and the secular state conflict, about which later on.

The Arshakunis: A dynastic family – 1/7 -

Perhaps no Armenian kingdom has impacted in the shaping of the Armenian nation more than the Arshakunis, the Arsacid Dynasty (Արշակունիներ). After all the members of the Arshakuni dynastic family transitioned the Armenian nation from worshipping the old gods to embracing Christianity, shaped the newly established church and state relations. It has a legendary king, Arshak II, after whom a legend has come down and an opera is named. If those were not enough,  a young monk by the name of Mesrob Mashdots invented the Armenian alphabet during their dynastic kingdom. It is no wonder that this dynastic family stirs the nation's imagination to this day. A Facebook account has been named after them. The name of one of their kings, young King Bab, is mentioned to this very day by no other than the sitting PM.  There is also a novel named after the young king. Who were the Arshakunis? This first segment is my translation of the Armenian Wikipedia that is also available only in Russian language. N.B. Henceforth I will use Arshak as the root word when addressing the family and its members. Vahe H. Apelian  

"The Arsacid Dynasty or (sometimes called the Arshakuni Dynasty) ruled the Kingdom of Armenia from 54 to 428. They started as a branch of the Parthian Arsacids but became a distinctly Armenian dynasty later on"

The Arshakuni Dynasty in a nutshell.

 

« The Kingdom of Arshakuni was an Armenian kingdom that existed in the years 66-428, whose capitals were Artashat (Ardashad), Vagharshapat (Vagharshabad) and Dvin. The Arshakunis ruling in this kingdom were related to the Arshakunis ruling in Persia, Aghvank (Caucasin Albania), Atrpatakan, and Virk (Kingdome of Iberia). In order to establish the kingdom, the Armenian-Parthian forces fought against the Romans for years. That war came to be known as the Ten Years' War. In the end, as a result of the Battle of Rhandeia, Rome accepted its defeat and called Drtad to Rome so that the latter would receive a crown from Emperor Nero.

Thus, the founder of the kingdom is Drtad I (Tiridates I of Armenia), who was crowned by the Roman emperor Nero in 66 and reigned until 88. During his reign, the pagan temple of Garni was built, and a war against the Alans (an ancient and medieval Iranic nomadic pastoral people of the North Caucasus) took place. 

Drtad I was followed by Sanatruk (88-110), who built the city of Mtsurk (Մծուրք). Arrianus (Արիանոս), when talking about him, mentioned that he was a middle-aged king who performed great deeds. After him, there was a struggle for the throne, which was finally resolved in 117, when Vagharsh I ascended the throne (117-140). During his reign, the Vartkesavan settlement on the Shresh (Շրեշ) hill developed so much that Vagharsh walled that city and named it Vagharshapat after himself. Vagharsh's death became an occasion for the Romans to place their own candidate on the Armenian throne, Sohaemus of Armenia (Սոհեմոս), who was distantly related to the Arshakunis and was a member of the Roman senate. Sohaemus reigned for 2 periods: 140-161. and 164-185 years. In 161, the Persians succeeded in elevating Pacorus of Armenia (Բակուր Ա) to the Armenian throne, but a few years later, in 163, he was dethroned and captured in Rome. In 185, the Arshakunyats throne was handed over to Vagharsh II, who was a powerful diplomat and politician. He was able to maintain neutrality between the two candidates fighting for the Roman throne so as not to endanger the independence of his country. During the reign of this king, the throne of the Arshakunyat kingdom began to pass from the father to the eldest son by inheritance. 

Emperor Nero crowing Drtad I, king of Armenia
(Courtesy Arshagouni Facebook account)

After the death of Vagharsh II in 198, the throne was passed to his son, Khosrov I of Armenia (Խոսրով Ա)  (198-215), who took revenge for his father's Vagharsh II’s  death who was killed fighting the mountaineers.

Vagharsh was assassinated by the Emperor Caracalla of Rome. The throne passed to Tiridates II of Armenia (Drtad II – Տրդատ Բ), who reigned from 216-252. During his reign, the Arshakunyats kingdom became powerful again. During the coup in Persia in 226, the ruling Arshakunis, who were friendly to the Armenian Arshakunis, were deprived of their power, and the power passed to the Sasanian Persians. In order to help them, in the same year, Drtad II – Տրդատ Բ -, invaded Ctesiphon (Տիզբոն) and won a victory over the Persians, but this did not save the Parthian Arshakunis. Finally, in 252, under the pressure of the Persians, Drtad II left for the Roman Empire. After the death of Trdat II, Artavazd ruled Armenia, followed by Khosrov II, after whose murder the "time of anarchy" began in Armenia, which lasted for about 26 years. During this period, the Persians enthroned the crown princes of the Persian throne in Armenia.

Finally, in 287, the son of Khosrov II, Tiridates III of Armenia, Drdat the Great, returned from Rome in 298, and established himself on the Armenian throne by the treaty of Mtsbin (Մծբին). During his reign, in 301, Armenia adopted Christianity as the state religion. He reigned until 330.

 After the death of Drtad the Great, the throne passed to Khosrov III the Small, Խոսրով Կոտակ Khosrow Kotak, who is famous for the first artificial forests he had planted. That forest currently bears his name, Khosrov forest. Khosrov built Dvin and resisted a series of Persian attacks. Khosrov reigned from 330-338.

After the death of Khosrov III, Tiran of Armenia (Տիրան Բ) ascended the throne (338-350). He was still a king living with pagan customs. The relations between the king and Catholicos St. Husik I (Հուսիկ Ա) were strained. The Catholicos Husik I (who was the grandsone of Catholicos Gregory the Illuminator) was killed by the order of the king. In the end, Tiran was blinded by the Persian king and left the throne to his son, Arshak II (Արշակ Բ), who became one of the most prominent kings of the Arshakuni kingdom. He resisted Persian invasions for years, but in the end, after being tricked by the Persian king Shapur II (Շապուհ II Երկարակյաց), he went to Ctesiphon (Տիզբոն) and was thrown into Anhush (Forgotten) Fortress.

 At this time, the young king Bab (Պապ Թագաւոր) returned to Armenia from Rome, restored Armenia's independence and ruled from 370-374. He won the battle of Battle of Bagavan (Ձիրավի ճակատամարտ) in 371, then started a series of reforms, among which was the reduction of church lands, also during his reign, Armenian Catholicos began to be ordained in Great Armenia. In 374, he was killed by the order of Roman Emperor Vaghes. After him, the kingdom of Arshakuni began to weaken.

Weak kings followed each other: Varazdat, Arshak III (Արշակ Գ), Khosrov IV of Armenia (Խոսրով Դ), during whose reign, in 387, Armenia for the first time was divided between Rome and Persia took place.

 In the year 405, during the reign of King Vramshapuh, an invention of nationalistic significance took place, the invention of the Armenian Alphabet by Mesrop Mashtots. 

Finally, the kingdom of Arshakuni finally fell during the reign of Artaxias IV (Artashes IV), in 428.

 

 

 

Celebrating the Republic of Armenia

Vahe H Apelian

The picture I posted is a composite from the front page of Aztag Daily special issue devoted to the 60th anniversary celebration of May 28 which we celebrated then as Independence Day. The other is from the first day cover of the stamp the postal service of Armenia issued celebrating May 28, as Armenia’s Independence Day. Arguably, May 28 and April 24 are the two days from our torturous history that will continue to remain entrenched in each and every one of us as long as we bear to be inheritors of the millennia old Armenian history.

 My mother had sent me this special issue, which I no longer have. I had left Lebanon two years earlier in 1976. My ties with the community understandably were much tighter. The special Aztag Daily issue is a huge spread. It measured 17.5 x 23 inches. Vehanoush Tekian, Vatche Proudian, and other young and upcoming have penned in this special issue.

May 28, 1978 happened to be a Sunday. Consequently, it is not far-fetched to imagine that the 60th anniversary celebration on that Sunday, became a special community event.  At least for the community that upheld and celebrated May 28 depicting it as the Armenian Independence Day. The community as a whole did not. 

From kindergarten to middle school, I was brought up in the Armenian community school system in Lebanon that celebrated May 28 as Armenian Independence Day and had the school closed on that day. After the middle school, I started attending the Armenian Evangelical College High School. The Armenian Evangelical community affiliated schools had May 28 as the schools’ picnic day. The Armenian Evangelical community schools were closed on that day and the schools organized outings to the country side. Consequently, for the next four years, I was off from a school day on May 28.

It was in college that the Armenian students from “this faction” school system and “that faction” school system got to get know each other and befriended. Surprisingly, coming from different Armenian school systems never factored in the friendships that ensued. It was in college, and I was visiting a classmate that I learned that not all Armenian schools closed on May 28, when I had assumed all did. It happened this way. I was surprised to hear my friend’s younger sister speaking of her homework for the next day that happened to be  May 28. I was astonished to hear that she had school on May 28. I asked her, isn’t her school closed tomorrow on May 28. “Why would the school close on May 28? “, she wondered, equally bewildered. She had absolutely no inkling of May 28. 

Who would have guessed then that 13 years, 3 months and 24 days later, on September 21, 1991, a referendum would be held in the Soviet Socialist Republic of Armenia to determine whether to secede or not from the Soviet Union. The referendum followed a declaration of independence which was issued on August 23, 1990.

The following year, the Armenian postal service issued its first stamp celebrating the Independence of Armenia, as the ARF faction of the Armenian Diaspora had been celebrating all along, after the Soviet takeover of the short lived first republic from May 28, 1918 to December 2, 1920. The Armenian postal service on May 28, 1992 issued, what collectors of stamps call First Day Cover, of the Armenian stamp celebrating May 28 Independence Day. Incidentally I have almost complete sets of stamps issued by Republics of Armenia and Artsakh.

Per Armenian law, 12 days are declared as non-working holidays. Naturally May 28 is among them, but instead of calling it Independence Day, it is termed as Republic Day (Hanrabedoutian Or), to celebrate the establishment of the democratic Republic of Armenia in 1918. It is not clear to me when the designating May 28, as Republic Day came about. Some claim that it came about in 1992, the year the Armenian postal service issued the first May 28 stamp designating it as Independence Day. 

  I believe that designating May 28, as republic day is the crowning achievement of centuries of struggle of the Armenians to have their own sovereign, democratic, free and independent Republic. I believe the republic as the state institution gives substance and structure to independence, which otherwise will be vulnerable. The first republic came about mostly by the dedication of mostly men and women who adhered to the Armenian Revolutionary Federation party. They are now upheld as the architects of the establishment of the first Republic of Armenia. Aram Manougian is accepted as the founder of the republic. ARF adopted the vision of the united Armenia in 1919, after the establishment of the Republic of Armenia.

That special issue of Aztag Daily announced on its front page that it is on on the occasion of the 60^th anniversary of the Republic of Armenia. During those years Armenian Independence Day was synonymous with free, independent Republic of Armenia as the short-lived first Armenian Republic had become, for all practical purposes, a captive nation within the Soviet Union. History moved at an unprecedented pace and on September 21, 1991, Soviet Socialist Republic voted for independence seceding from the Soviet Union.

 On may 28, I also join the hundreds of thousands of the citizens of Armenia who are officially exempt from work that day, and Armenians wold-wide, celebrating the promise of bringing forth a republic on May 28, 1918, after being stateless for the preceding 543 years, since the fall of the last Armenian kingdom, the Cilician kingdom, in 1375. 

"1919 May 28, Yerevan, Independence Day parade starting from Apovyan street, towards the Armenian Republic’s Parliament building, headed by a woman dressed in black, symbolizing the bloody past of Armenia, and behind her is a woman dressed in white, symbolizing the present day Armenia, the newly-independent Armenia. In their front, two men from Western Armenian and from Eastern Armenia are walking hand-in-hand, symbolizing the Unity of the Armenian Nation. The first and second automobiles are surrounded by men holding posters of the newly liberated Armenian Provinces (Moush, Sasoun, Dikranakerd, Sis etc.). On either side of the parade, we can see the refugees, the orphans and the Armenian military. Indeed, a very touching scene is immortalized." (courtesy Kegham Papazian)

 

  

Clashes with police in Armenia - բախումներ ոստիկանների հետ Հայաստանում

 What the police faces in Armenia cannot be compared with the happenings of the police in the United States or in Canada. 

The clashes with the Armenian police are deliberate and are pre- planned under the guise of so-called political disobedience, to provoke the police to do what the policemen are called upon to do, maintain civilian order so that Armenian citizens can go about their daily lives, and then cry foul..

There is a very tense political atmosphere in America, the like of which I have not encountered since I immigrated to the U.S. in 1976.  But I do not foresee disobedience against police as an act of anti administration politically planned  disobedience. I believe that the American would not resort to such a form of opposition to the current government.  I have not read such  incidents in Ganada, that is to say deliberate clashes with the Canadian police  as opposition to Justin Trudea's  rule. Or, for that matter in Lebanon. The Lebanese police response to the Armenians demonstrating against the Azerbaijan Embassy in Lebanon, was brutal but the Lebanese Armenians response, and the response of the Armenian press, make your guess what it was......

In any event, under no ircumstances, I imagine, an American Armenian or a Canadian Armenian would resort to such opposition, or at least I can safely say that it is very unlikely that an ethnic Armenian citizen in Canada or in the U.S. of America will  do such a thing.

Deliberate disobedience against the Armenian police as a form of political disobedience, Armenians resort  only in Armenia!.  The psychology of King Arshak II appears to prevail to this day. 

This sort of civil disobedience has every possibility of becoming an endemic political culture in Armenia. Today opposition against this Armenian governement, and tomorrow that opposition against the next government. Until a totalitarian regime takes over to put things in order.

As the Armenian saying goes, I hope that  Armenia «little by little does not become sifted.» And the sifting is, flee for your life, anywhere else, other than anywhere in Armenia.

***

 

Պատշաճ էր որ Արեւելահայերէնով վերնագրէի այս պլակս։

ՀԱՅԱՍՏԱՆԻ ՈՍՏԻԿԱՆՈՒԹԵԱՆ ՀԱՆԴԷՊ ՊԱՏԱՀԱՐՆԵՐԸ երբէ՚՛ք կարելի չէ բաղդատել Ամերիկայի կամ Գանատայի ոստիկանութեան պատահարներուն։ Հայաստանինը դիտաւորեալ է եւ ծրագրուած է որպէս՝ այսպէս կոչուած քաղաքական անհնազանդութիւն, գրգռելու համար ոստիկանութիւնը ընել այն ինչ որ ոստիկանը պարտի ընել՝ պահել կարգ ու կանոն որպէսզի Հայասանցի քաղաքացին իր առօրեան տանի։

Քաղաքական շատ լարուած մտնոլորտ կը տիրէ Ամերիկայի մէջ որուն նմանը չեմ հանդիպած նախապէս։ Բայց ուրախ եմ որ ոտսիտկանութեան դէմ անհնազանդութիւն չեմ տեսներ եւ յուսամ որ նման ձեւի չի դիմեր Ամերիկացին, ներկայ իշխանութեան դէմ ընդիմադրութեան համար։  Նման պատահար չեմ կարդացած Գանատայի մէջ, Գանատայի ոստիկանութեան հանդէպ՝ օրինակ որպէս Դրուտոյի իշխանութեան հանդէպ ընդիմադրութիւն։

Ամէն պարագայի տակ, այդպիսի բան չընէր եւ կը պատկերացնեմ որ պիտի չընէ Ամերիկահայը կամ Գանատահայը։ Հայ ոստիկանութեան դէմ անհնազանդութիւնը որպէս քաղաքական անհնազանդութեան ձեւ, կը պատահի միայն Հայասանի մէջ ուր տիրողը Արշակ Բ թագաւոր հոգեբանութիւնն է։  Այսպէս այս օրակարգը քաաքական մշակոյթ ըլլալու ամէն հաւանականութիւնը ունի։ 

Այսօր այսպէս, իսկ վաղը յաջորդ իշխանութեան դէմ։ Եւ այսպէս յուսամ կամաց-կամաց Հայաստանը չըլլայ մաղած։