Footnotes to Koriwn

 Footnotes to my translation of Koriwn

by Beyon Miloyan

Chapter 3

1. Հազարապետ (hazarapet) — lit. chiliarch (χιλίαρχος). In Yeghishe’s History, the title is used once to refer to Mihrnarseh, who, elsewhere in the same source, is referred to as the վզուրկ հրամատար wuzurg framadar (see Daryaee, 2000: https://iranicaonline.org/articles/mehr-narseh). Thus, the two positions have been equated (see Shayegan, 2003: https://iranicaonline.org/articles/hazarbed). However, in IV.2 of his History of the Armenians, P’awstos Buzand gives a slightly different connotation, emphasizing the role of the hazarapet in overseeing the country, keeping it built up/inhabited/cultivated, and tasked especially with the flourishing of peasants/villagers. In line with this notion, the Holy Translators also used հազարապետ to render stewardship or guardianship for a ruler (cf. Luke 8:3, ἐπίτροπος), as well as  stewardship to a household, and in a more abstract sense, the mysteries and graces of God, etc. (cf. 1 Cor 4:1-2, 1 Pet 4:10; Galatians 4:2; οἰκονόμους).

 

Chapter 13

 

1. ի կայենականսն (i kayenakansn) —

 

Possibly a derivation of կայան, կայք (station, place, post, position, standing, position, base, [στάσις], abode, dwelling [δίαιτα]), though this word is always modified, as in the previous chapter («կայս թագաւորացն») and several times in Agathangelos: «յարքայական կայանին» (158), «թագաւորանիստ կայեանսն» (776), «թագաւորաբնակ կայեանսն» (785), and «սուրբ կայեանս» (139). In this instance, however, we have an unusual adjectival form (-ական) without modification, which leads us to seek a more satisfactory alternative.

Though I was not able to find any references to a place called Kaye(a)n from sources belonging to the same period, there are later references to several such places in Armenia, suggesting that it was not an uncommon place name: The 13th century historian, Kirakos Gandzaketsi, identifies «Կայենոյ գաւառ» (the district of Kayen) as the place where Getik monastery (i.e., Goshavank) was built by Mkhitar Gosh. Elsewhere, he refers to «աշխարհն Կայենոյ» (the land of Kayen) and «բերդն Կայենոյ» (the fortress of Kayen [probably, Mahkanaberd]). The 13th century historian, Stepanos Orebelean, also refers to Կայեն տեղի (the place Kayen) near Haghartsin, as well as to the villages of Gegharkuni, Kotayk and Kayen, which he locates in Vayots Dzor. There is also a Կայենոյ ձոր (valley of Kayen) that lies farther north, between Haghpat and Sanahin.

If կայենական is indeed a place name, as I treat it here, then the adjectival form (-ական) would not be out of place, as Koriwn uses this it other place names also, as with «Սամուսատական քաղաքն» (the Samosatan city), Սինէական լեառն (the Sinaitic mountain) and «Տարօնական գաւառն» (the district of Taron). The use of the locative plural case-ending here is also not without precedent, as with «մօտ ի Լալօնսն» (near the place of weeping, 2 Samuel 5:23), «ի Մուրտաստանսն» (in Myrsinon, Judges 1:35), «գեղւն, որում Արդեանսն կոչեն» (the village that they call Arteank, Buzand V.6), etc.

 

2. յՌոտաստակն Գողթան (yRotastakn Gołtan) –  

 

This term has garnered a good deal of interest. Variants in Koryun include առոտս տակն and առ ոտս տանն, which do not offer much clarity. A nearly identical version of this sentence is found in Agathangelos (841): «Հասանէր եւ յառաջին դաստակերտսն իւր, յռոտաստակն Այրարատեան գաւառին ի Վաղարշապատ քաղաք...», with various spellings across manuscripts: յոռոդաստակն, յռոդաստակն, յռոյտաստակն, յըռոաստակն, յըռոտոտակն and յըռոտանտակն.

The 7^th century Geography of Anania Shirakatsi includes Ռոտստակ as a district in the marzpanate of Aghuank (see Hewsen). Movses Dasxuranci, in Book 2 of the History of the Aghuans, includes Rostak (Ռոստակ) in the district of Mets Koghmank. Similarly, Adontz (1908) equates Ռոտակ and Ռոտստակ as the name of a district near Goghtan (see Garsoian). A reference to two nearby districts may have seemed a natural interpretation here, but as we have seen, Agathangelos uses ռոտստակ in conjunction with Ayrarat district (Այրարատեան գաւառ), suggesting that it should not be understood here as a place name, though Kanayants (1913) makes an interesting case that ռոտստակ as district (see below) could have been incorporated into various place names. Still, treating ռոտստակ as a place name does not seem entirely satisfactory given the parallel use in Agathangelos.

In line with this, Fr. Alishan first suggested the word to be a borrowing of the Persian  رستاق (rustaq), meaning a district with towns, villages, and cultivated land. This, too, may seem unsatisfactory, when we consider that (a) Koryun, in Chapter 5, introduces Goghtan as “that unruly and neglected place” (յանկարգ եւ յանդարման տեղիս), and (b) that Agathangelos refers to “the Rotastak of the district of Ayrarat (յՌոտստակն Այրարատեան գաւառին), which would render գաւառ redundant ("the district of the district of Ayrarat"?). Still, Kanayants insists on ռոտաստակ, pointing out other such redundancies in Agathangelos’ History, as, e.g., «եկին հասին յերկիր Հայաստան աշխարհիս» (209). Acharian (1926) echoes Fr. Alishan and draws on a larger number of cognates to suggest that the term denotes a district and/or its capital city, as well perhaps its environs. A number of unsatisfactory proposals have been made, as with Gargashian (1895), who suggested “dangerous descent”. I omit these here, though it is perhaps worth noting Marr's (1896) interesting study, where he suggests “a vineyard irrigated by canals” based on Georgian and Persian cognates.

Here, we take the term to refer to the district Goghtan, consistent with Khorenatsi (3:47): «եւ երթեալ ի գաւառն Գողթան բնակէ զմիայնակեցութեան վարս ստացեալ։» “He [Mashtots] went to live in the district of Goghtan, and led an eremitic life.”)

 

Chapter 15

1.  դայեկաբար —

τιθηνήσασθαι (3 Maccabees 3:9); դայեակ is, principally, a nurse. The word is used once in the New Testament in 1 Thessalonians 2:7, where it corresponds with τροφός. But the word had a much richer connotation for Armenian authors of the period, where it signified also guardianship and/or preceptorship. See Bedrosian (1994): https://iranicaonline.org/articles/dayeakutiwn

 Chapter 16

 

1. Միով աստուածաբարբառ պատգամաւքն — 

 

A difficult phrase to translate. At first sight, there appears to be a disagreement between the singular instrumental case of “one” (միով) and the plural instrumental of “word, oracle” (պատգամաւքն), but պատգամ should be treated here as singular (see, e.g., Psalm 32:4 LXX, Isaiah 39:5, Jer 34:4, etc.), as with օրէնք, կրօնք, etc. The second question pertains to the meaning of պատգամ, which, in modern Armenian, usually means message. However, the word is never in this way in the New Testament; rather, պատգամ is used either to render ῥῆμα (word, utterance, saying), or λόγιον (oracle, divine utterance). The closest parallel here is with Hebrews 12:19 «բարբառ պատգամացն» (φωνῇ ῥημάτων) — ‘a voice speaking words’, but for a closer parallel with բարբառ in this instance, see Genesis 11:1: «Եւ էր ամենայն երկիր լեզու մի, եւ բարբառ մի ամենեցուն:» (καὶ ἦν πᾶσα ἡ γῆ χεῖλος ἕν καὶ φωνὴ μία πᾶσιν), where it signifies a common speech, as Koryun uses it here. See also Acts 1:19, where the translator uses բարբառ to render διάλεκτος (լեզու). Hence, “with one divine language (διάλεκτος, φωνή) with which to utter words”.

2. Ելեալ վիճակ (ելանել վիճակ) — 

 

I treat this as a single unit, meaning to fall to someone’s lot (cf. Joshua 17:5, 18:11, 19:10, 19:17, 19:24,  19:32, 19:40, 21:4, 21:10; Judges 1:3, 20:9; 1 Kings 10:20-21 LXX; 1 Kings 14:42 LXX; 1 Chron 24:7, 25:9, 26:12, 26:14, 26:14; Nehemiah 11:1; Psalm 15:6 LXX; Jonah 1:7; 3 Maccabees 5:6). The phrase is used only once in the New Testament, in Acts 1:26 (ἔδωκαν κλήρους). Վիճակ (κλῆρος) is also used various times to indicate casting lots (վիճակաւ — by lots; վիճակ արկանել — to throw lots; տալ վիճակ — to give lots), and the translators also use it to render κατάσχεσις (cf. Acts 7:45) — a possession. There is also the phrase առնուլ վիճակ — to take a place/position (cf. Acts 1:25, λαβεῖν τὸν τόπον), which Koryun uses in Chapter 1.

 

 Chapter 17

1. թագաւորին Հոռոմոց, ի կողմանս Յունաց — 

 

"the Roman king, Greek territories": both references to what has been known as the Byzantine empire since the work of Hieronymus Wolf. However, this Greek-Roman distinction was not uncommon among Golden Age Armenian authors, and would be worth studying. Koryun, for example, refers to Greek lands and territories, Greek learning, Greek literature and the Greek language, but to the Roman king and Caesar.

 

2. յանդրուարն դիմոսական — 

 

Դիմոսական is a transliteration of δημόσιος (public, state) with the adjectival suffix -ական. Vardazaryan (2019) makes a strong case that անդրուար is a reference to the angaria, the Roman imperial transport and courier system borrowed from the Achaemenids. So I treat this as the state carriage (imperial transport).

 

3. աշխարհամուտ դուռն — 

 

"the court (դուռն) where the world enters (աշխարհամուտ)": The term is used only three times in early Armenian literature, the other two being by Agathangelos and Khorenatsi. All three refer to the court in Constantinople, suggesting that it is a calque of a Greek word. Michael Bonner suggests οἰκουμενικός (personal communication).

 

4. Տիեզերական քաղաքն — 

 

While տիեզեր (adjectival, տիեզերական) is used almost exclusively in modern Armenian to refer to the universe, it was only used by the Holy Translators of the New Testament to refer to the inhabited world (οἰκουμένῃ). Cosmos (κόσμος), in contrast, was rendered աշխարհ, which, in modern Armenian is closer to οἰκουμένῃ. Thus, I treat տիեզերական քաղաք as the metropolis of the inhabited world (i.e., the capital of the Roman empire).

 

 Chapter 20

1. Ազգին զդպրութիւն առաւել յարգել եւ դիւրացուցանել —

 

“To further engage with and facilitate their nation’s literature”, դպրութիւն correspond with the Greek γράμμα, meaning learning, education, letters (of the alphabet as well as literature), writing and books, all of which apply here. In several earlier instances, I opted for learning; here, in the context of this chapter, I opt for literature. On դիւրացուցանել (“to facilitate”), it should be noted that the same term is used in Isaiah 55:11 to render εὐοδόω (to prosper, or to lead by a direct and easy way). Though this connotation works well here, εὐοδόω is only rendered in the NT as յաջողել, so I avoid this use here.