Onnik
Yeganyan
The Old
Collection of the Library of Etchmiadzin
(Translated into English by Gohar Topchyan)
The collection of Armenian manuscripts at Matenadaran
is based on that of the former library of Etchmiadzin. Its history began roughly on the crucial
day when the celebrated son of the Armenian people Mesrop Mashtots created the
Armenian alphabet and laid the foundation for national literature.
Being the heart of the Armenian state and its
spiritual life, at the dawn of the 5th century the capital city
Vagharshapat became the intellectual center of the country. The graduates of
its schools filled Armenia with the everlasting light of Mesrop Mashtots by
bequeathing to the future generations a remarkable classical literature that
always served as an endless source of hope and encouragement through the ups
and downs of the rich history of Armenia.
Having become the newly-founded educational centre where
the first translators were translating Syriac and Greek literature with
incessant vigour and diligence and the earliest Armenian authors were composing
their first works, Vagharshapat had to establish its own library (column 14).
The history, unfortunately, is too scant and provides
almost no information about Vagharshapat�s library of the time and its manuscripts.
However, it is not difficult to assume that they should have been first of all in
Greek and Syriac and contained religious texts and theological, dogmatic works
of the Christian Fathers, which were necessary for spreading and strengthening the
new religion. Afterwards this collection must have been enriched by books
brought to the motherland from Amida, Edessa and Samosata by Mesrop Mashtots
and his pupils as well as those who had studied in Athens and Alexandria. Later
on, Vagharshapat�s library would enrich with Armenian translations of those manuscripts
and original works of the first Armenian authors. �Thus, in the first quarter of the 5th century,
Vagharshapat�s library must have already had a rather rich collection of Greek,
Assyrian and Armenian manuscripts.
The only reliable information regarding Vagharshapat�s
library and its manuscripts is given by the 5th-century historian Ghazar
Parpetsi in his Letter to Vahan
Mamikonian where, denying the accusations of his enemies, he writes inter alia:
�For they did not even give me back those Greek books, which now have become
there food for worms. But then would those who live in that place really be
enlightened by reading them, or would they enlighten others?� (Thomson, 259).
Even though this information refers to a time when
Vagharshapat had already lost its former glory and was no longer a royal
residence, it nevertheless testifies that there was a library in Vagharshapat even
during that gloomy period and, together with Armenian manuscripts, it also accommodated
�Greek books.�
However, no further information can be found as to
what cultural role Vagharshapat played in the following centuries and whether
the cultural life continued. Unfortunately, even manuscripts copied in Vagharshapat
before the mid-15th century have not reached us. �
As we know, because of Armenia�s political instability
and the frequent invasions and plunders of hostile hordes, the patriarchal seat
was often moved to either Dvin or Ani, or to remote Cilicia.
�When the secular authorities of our nation weakened,�
writes Simeon Yerevantsi, �and the enemies grew stronger and the outlaws often
committed crimes, whenever the time was advantageous and wherever a favourable,
suitable and safe place was found, our kings and princes, together with
patriarchs, would settle there and fortify it.�
This circumstance, certainly, could not have a
positive impact because it would interfere with the development of intellectual
life in Vagharshapat which, being a cultural centre, was considered inferior to
others at safer locations, such as the monasteries of Syunik, Vaspurakan and
Cilicia.
Despite the foregoing, Etchmiadzin has always remained
�the mother of faith and the head of all Armenian churches�, as it is
corroborated by the 14th-century chronicler Mkrtich Metsopetsi in his True and Concise History of Mkhitar Vardapet.
Therefore as such, no matter how humble and poor, Vagharshapat could nevertheless
have never been completely deserted.
It is well known that some of the patriarchs, princes
and kings of that time, especially when the patriarchal throne was in Dvin and
Ani, during their extensive construction works also paid attention to
Etchmiadzin, rebuilt, decorated it and appointed abbots there. For instance, in
485 the abbot of Etchmiadzin was Ghazar Parpetsi, in 565, Kyurion, in 596,
Abraham, and in 618, Hovhanik (columns 15�16).�
At the beginning of the 9th century, under Smbat
Ablabas Bagratuni (Smbat the Confessor), the Arab governor of Spk, plundered
�The Holy Cathedral of Vagharshapat� together with many other monasteries. It
is clear that only a prospering cathedral could be plundered. In 982, the
Persian tyrant Ablhaj took down the cross from the cathedral�s dome. This once
again proves that the Monastery of Etchmiadzin was still operating in the last
quarter of the 10th century.
In the next centuries, when the patriarchal seat was
moved to Cilicia, Etchmiadzin �was completely deserted until 1441,� as Simeon
Yerevantsi writes. Even though there is no clear evidence, it may be assumed
(as Garegin Hovsepian does on the basis of Mkhitar Sasnetsi�s pilgrimage to
Etchmiadzin in 1281 and that of Stepanos Orbelian 20 years later) that even in the
13th�14th centuries Etchmiadzin, though unremarkable, was nevertheless not
entirely abandoned.
The lack of historical evidence and the absence of
literary works certainly testify to the inactivity of Etchmiadzin (especially
after the patriarchal seat had been moved to Cilicia). However, this is not
enough to assume that the intellectual life completely ceased to exist because,
from this point of view, Etchmiadzin is not an exception. It is known that no
literary works have reached us from Dvin, Ani and other centres which, during
certain periods of Armenian history, were not inferior to Etchmiadzin in terms
of their political and cultural roles.
Despite all this, we must nevertheless admit that
especially after the patriarchal seat was moved to Cilicia, the role of
Etchmiadzin was minimal in the ecclesiastical and cultural history of Armenia.
Many of the eminent figures of that time, such as
Khachatur Kecharetsi, Stepanos Orbelian, Tovma Metsopetsi and others, wished
for Etchmiadzin to flourish again and reacquire its former glory, and for the
patriarchal seat to be moved back there. One of the vivid examples of this desire
are the following lines from Stepanos Orbelian�s famous �Elegy� written in 1299
at the request of Khachatur Kecharetsi:
Where are you, my precious children?
Return to me, your erstwhile mother,
And as it behooves all children,
Look after your aged parent.
������������������������������������ (Sanjian,
275)
This desire, which had certain political implications
as well, finally comes true and, after an interval of 1000 years (441�1441), in
1441, the patriarchal seat was moved from Sis to Etchmiadzin. Following this
event, of course, construction works began in Etchmiadzin, new monks joined the
monastery and Etchmiadzin with the neighbouring monasteries again became a prosperous
intellectual and scriptorial centre. The numerous manuscripts copied in
Etchmiadzin and the neighbouring monasteries between the 15th and 16th
centuries attest to the revitalization of the intellectual life.
The never-ending Turkish-Persian invasions and wars of
the 14th and especially of the first quarter of the 17th centuries, tax
collections and plunders once again devastated Etchmiadzin. Under the patriarchate
of Catholicos Movses (1629�1632), as Arakel Davrizhetsi reports, Etchmiadzin
was in an extremely desolate state. Davrizhetsi writes: �Thus, the divine Holy
See was completely devoid of property and robbed of treasures, there were no
books, and neither services nor scripture readings took place.�
Catholicos Philippos Aghbaketsi (1633�1655), the successor
of Catholicos Movses renovated the Monastery of Etchmiadzin by intensive
construction works, built the bell tower, opened a school and ordered to copy
numerous and various manuscripts. During his patriarchate, the Monastery of Etchmiadzin
was enriched with golden and silver tableware (columns 17�18), clothes and
acquired �books containing many writings for the spiritual and secular needs of
the people,� as we read in a colophon of a manuscript copied in 1663. Arakel
Davrizhetsi, referring once again to the construction works of Catholicos
Philippos, writes: �And especially, the Holy See of Etchmiadzin in this way was
established more firmly and enriched with church vessels, gold and silver,
expensive garments, as well as with numerous excellent learned works.�
The construction works undertaken by Philippos
Aghbaketsi gained more impetus and expanded under his successor Hakob
Jughayetsi (1655�1680). The latter not only made sure that the monastery was filled
with expensive tableware but also took care to expand the library. Thanks to
him, many learned archimandrites were working at the Monastery of Etchmiadzin;
among them was Stepanos Lehatsi who not only greatly enriched Armenian
literature with original works and new translations but also taught many
students. In reference to the construction works of Hakob Jughayetsi, the same colophon
reads the following: �Thanks to this, the cathedral obtained tableware,
numerous vessels and many books, as well as a great number of manuscripts experts
and students.�
The colophon of Stepanos Lehatsi�s translation (1662) of
Dionysius the Areopagite's works illustrates in an eloquent manner the
splendour that the Monastery of Etchmiadzin had achieved under Hakob
Jughayetsi. Here the translator, explaining the incentives behind the new
translation of this work, writes that it was completed �...at the request of
the benevolent brothers who were educating themselves at the Mother See of Holy
Etchmiadzin ... as at the time there were many prominent, learnt and skilled archimandrites;
one of them was Arakel Vardapet, a distinguished scholar and author, who has beautifully
and accurately written the chronicle of patriarchs and kings for eternal memory.�
These testimonies are confirmed by hundreds of literary
works written or copied in the 17th century in Etchmiadzin, part of which (57
manuscripts) today occupy an honourable place in Matenadaran�s rich collection
of manuscripts. The activities of Stepanos Lehatsi and his students were especially
fruitful, since many of the above-mentioned manuscripts are the products of
their efforts. �
At that time, Etchmiadzin�s Matenadaran or, as the
contemporaries called it, library, was already an organised institution and had
its own �librarian� or today�s �matenadaranapet.� The first one known to us was
a student of Stepanos Lehatsi, Nerses Sarkavag, who wrote the following in a
manuscript copied in 1662: �May you remember me as Nerses the Librarian and the
one who copied this book.�
It is difficult to determine till when the library of
Etchmiadzin remained organised and for how long and to what extent it was of
service to monks and students. However, judging from an extensive and valuable
colophon of a manuscript copied by Stepanos Dashtetsi in 1714, at the end of
the century, during the catholicosate of Nahapet Urhayetsi (1691�1705), it was
no longer �the library of Holy Etchmiadzin� but rather the personal library of
the catholicos, whose doors were probably closed for monks and academics. When
speaking about using Nerses Lambronatsi�s works, Stepanos Dashtetsi writes: �...It
was with great desire and difficulty, and without the knowledge of the
archimandrites, that I took them from the library of the thrice blessed Ter Nahapet
at the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin...� (columns 19�20).���������������
The next century was one of the gloomiest periods in
the history of not only Armenia but also of the Monastery of Etchmiadzin and
its library.� However, throughout the
18th century Etchmiadzin never ceased to be a productive and prolific scriptorium
where numerous manuscripts were written and copied (around 144 of them are now
in Matenadaran). The library remained in a rather organised state, which is
proven by old seals found in numerous manuscripts with the inscription �The
book belongs to Holy Etchmiadzin� (see, e.g., MS. 686, fol. 222v, 667, fol.
388v, 6392, fol. 1r, etc.). However, the Turkish-Persian destructive wars, the
brutality of the local Persian rulers, the frequent plunders, as well as many
high-ranking clergymen�s disinterest in learning emptied the monastery and its
library from manuscripts and knowledge-hungry monks to the extent that at the
end of the century very few manuscript treasures remained from the former thousands
and no scholar was left.�
The first quarter of the 19th century, especially the
first decade, was not any more favourable for the library of Etchmiadzin or for
Etchmiadzin in general. At the beginning of the 19th century, the Russian-Persian
wars and later the Russian-Turkish wars, as well as the conflicts between Catholicoi
David and Daniel and their followers completely devastated the economy of
Etchmiadzin and its library.
In 1804, before the conquest of Etchmiadzin by the
Russian army, Catholicos David, with his followers� help and the Persians�
support moved the most valuable part of Etchmiadzin�s treasures to the fortress
of Erevan in order to save them from the Russians. The treasures included
numerous superb manuscripts which were never returned. But when the Tsarist army
unexpectedly left Etchmiadzin and retreated, the Persian troops completely
plundered the unprotected Etchmiadzin, especially its monastery. The library�s
manuscripts were also plundered and later sold �in loads and thousands� at the
squares of Tabriz.
Tsitsianov�s army too had not left empty-handed and
during retreat had taken many treasures belonging to Etchmiadzin to Tiflis.
They were kept �at the imperial depository together with the imperial treasures
and were registered one by one.�
Even though there is no specific information about stolen
manuscripts, it can be assumed that many were among those treasures. This can
be proven not only by the subsequent appearance of a number of manuscripts with
Etchmiadzin�s seal in various libraries and private collections in Russia (some
of them were later returned to Matenadaran) but also by the fact that after the
war many manuscripts were among the items that were returned to Matenadaran thanks
to the efforts of Catholicos Daniel.
During those years the library of Etchmiadzin was
emptied and deserted to the extent that when in 1814 Nikolay Petrovic Rumyantsev
wrote to Etchmiadzin requesting copies of manuscripts for his library, Nerses
Ashtaraketsi bitterly replied with the following letter: �However, we are
unlucky, because in recent days our rich library of the Ararat See of Holy
Etchmiadzin has been plundered in such a way that Yeprem himself, the Patriarch
of All Armenians, made utmost efforts to fulfil the wish of Your Excellency.
But to this day he has been hardly able to acquire only two Histories of Armenia, one by Vardan
Vardapet Bardzraberdtsi and the other by Mattheos Yerets Urhayetsi, one copy of
each, the first written in 1432 and the second in 1688. And by order of His
Holiness, in 1814 a copy of each manuscript was made here in Tiflis, presenting
the authorial text faithfully in all respects. I am sending these to you. Yes,
it would really be good luck if the library of the Ararat See heard the sweet
voice of your wish and request in the former days of its richness. But since
the general violence in this land has deprived the Haykazean See and
particularly its local division here of its former glory, I beg you to accept
kindly those two booklets as a gift and especially as a token of our diligence�
(columns 21�22). ����������������
Later, on a different occasion, Catholicos Hovhannes
Karbetsi also spoke about the desolate state of Etchmiadzin�s library. In his Bull
N 98 of April 14, 1833, addressed to Professor Clossius at the University of Dorpat,
he writes the following: �Because of endless conquests and massacres, the
Armenian nation and her literature were exhausted and destroyed to the extent
that from thousands of books barely a thousand have remained from our
ancestors. From the time when my motherland rested under the beneficent reign
of the Russian emperors, the Armenians have undertaken to collect their literature.�
When the disastrous conflict between David and Daniel finally
came to an end and Daniel took the patriarchal seat (1807�1808), he began to
bring together the dispersed monks, returned part of the stolen property and
treasures and carried out reforms. He wanted to �restore the splendour of the
destroyed Mother See� but the resumed Russian-Persian military actions and the
death of the catholicos prevented the realisation of this plan.
However, what Daniel was unable to accomplish due to
circumstances was achieved in the days of Catholicos Yeprem (1809�1827). During
his patriarchate, as Mser Mseryan writes, �until the year 1827 the land of
Ararat, together with the Mother See of Etchmiadzin, was in peace and
quietness, for there was neither any trouble of war from anywhere nor
captivity, plunder and levy of taxes.�
In this relatively peaceful period, Yeprem managed to
restore the monastic economy of Etchmiadzin and to carry out some construction
work and renovations. He also made sure that the plundered library of
Etchmiadzin was once again enriched not only by acquiring new manuscripts but
also by bringing back stolen literary treasures. �One of the missions of his envoys, who were
sent to Western Armenia, Persia, Russia and India to preach, was to �take care
of obtaining oldest manuscripts for the library of the Mother See.�
During Yeprem�s patriarchate, Etchmiadzin�s library was
once again revived. The manuscripts were sealed with the inscription �The book
belongs to the library of Holy Etchmiadzin, 1813�, which shows that the library
was put under the tutelage of a special official. The fact that the library
already had 1809 manuscripts when Manvel Gyumushkhanetsi visited Etchmiadzin
from Crimea in 1828, testifies to the ardent efforts of those years put towards
collecting manuscripts.
Unfortunately, today it is impossible to determine which
manuscripts already belonged to Etchmiadzin and which ones were acquired from other
places and individuals. Etchmiadzin�s library, just like other Armenian
monasteries, did not regularly keep a record of the manuscripts, at least no
such record has reached us or been mentioned. In regard to Etchmiadzin�s
library, the evidence suggests that the manuscripts were in a state of
negligence and the library was in a severe disorder because of which numerous
excellent manuscripts either rotted or were alienated over time, becoming the
property of many other libraries and individuals. Two such manuscripts (which
are not unique) bearing the seal with the inscription �The book belongs to the
library of Holy Etchmiadzin, 1813� (columns 23�24) after a long journey were
brought to Matenadaran only in 1924, together with the rich and valuable
collection of the Lazaryan Institute. Referring to those two manuscripts, Mesrop
Ter-Movsisyan wrote: �In May 1902 I made a list of the Armenian manuscripts of the
Lazaryan Institute. There I came across two manuscripts which had been purchased
from the H. Enfiyachyan library and donated to the Institute. Both bore the
seal of our library.�
A vivid evidence of Etchmiadzin�s library being
plundered by its own people is given by Manvel Vardapet Gyumushkhanetsi. In his
work entitled The Etchmiadzin Library was
Organised, he writes with bitterness: �Before us this library was collected
by Arakel called Chapi, a clerk of the Holy Illuminator Church of Galata,
Constantinople. When coming to the See, he took his beloved manuscripts to
Constantinople and elsewhere. After that, in 1819, Grigor Vardapet Vardazaryants
Ashtaraketsi, a corrector and instructor at the printing-house of Etchmiadzin,
had the library at hand together with his pupil Yeznak, son of Mirze Thadeos. A
hundred of beautiful and useful works of the library are in his possession.
Also, I found Yakob Vardapet Kayinean�s Commentary
on the Song of Songs in the house of the mentioned Yeznak, as if it was a
present from us. I wished to leave in Etchmiadzin other Armenian works as well,
but since I was afraid that they would fall into such perfidious hands, in 1830
I took them to the island of Sevan and gave them to pious clerics for their
delight.����
From 1828 on, a new phase started for the history of
the whole Eastern Armenia as well as of the Etchmiadzin library when the
Russian army conquered Yerevan and banished the Persians from the khanates of Yerevan
and Nakhijevan to the other side of the Arax River.
The liberation of Eastern Armenia from the Persian
yoke and its unification with Russia not only saved a considerable part of the
Armenian nation from physical annihilation but also created opportunities for
the rise of its economic and cultural life.
These favourable conditions enabled the Catholicoi of
Etchmiadzin not only to think about the revival of the monastery�s deteriorated
economy but also to take care of the library�s organization and enrichment.
For the first time, by order of Nerses Ashtaraketsi,
Manvel Gyumushkhanetsi took charge of the library�s organisation with the help
of Dionysius Vardapet Yerevantsi, Hovhannes Vardapet Georgian Shahriartsi (Hovhannes
Shahkhatunyants) and Mser Dpir Grigoryan (Mser Mseryan).
Mser Mseryan, who witnessed the unorganised state of
Etchmiadzin and, especially, the library, wrote the following about the
measures Manvel Gyumushkhanetsi had taken: �The library was above the refectory
and contained numerous printed and handwritten, old and new books. Having had
no protector and having fallen into the hands of ignorant people, the library
remained neglected, as a result of which many excellent manuscripts were lost,
the half of them rotted. This lasted till the year 1828 of our Lord, when
Manvel Vardapet Gyumushkhanetsi arrived from Crimea and saw the desolate state
of the library. He restored and organised it with my and two other vardapets�
support, by order of Archbishop Nerses, who held the overall authority in
Etchmiadzin as the successor to Patriarch Yeprem.�
Manvel Gyumushkhanetsi himself speaks in detail about
the unorganised and desolate state of Etchmiadzin�s library in his work
entitled The Etchmiadzin Library was Organised,
where, inter alia, he writes: �After such people had interfered in the
library�s affairs and destroyed its integrity, we found it in a disorderly
state, deprived of manuscripts of whose existence in the Mother See we had
learned from afar from our scholarly fathers. Besides these, manuscripts which
had not been regarded as valuable enough and were devoid of even moth-eaten
covers, before the previous intrusion (columns 25�26) had been taken to Venice
and other places, where they were kept with due care, wrapped in boxes to
preserve their magnificence. During the previous unworthy intrusion, the
library had been turned into a sort of fruit storage. Important, beautiful and
new books seemed to have been suffered plunder; they had fallen down from their
shelves and were in a disorderly and careless state.�
Together with his collaborators, Manvel
Gyumushkhanetsi in a short amount of time organised Etchmiadzin�s library and
made a list of the manuscript collection. Referring to his own efforts, at the beginning
of his manuscript list he writes: �In 1828, since April 25th, by order of
Archbishop Nerses, the highest authority, Etchmiadzin�s library was handed over
to me so that I could, to the extent possible, properly and correctly organise
it by numbering. We started first of all to organise the manuscripts
alphabetically and numbered them.�
On another occasion, referring to his work at
Etchmiadzin�s library, he says: �Together with such polite and clever people [he
meant his above-mentioned collaborators � O. Y.] and with much effort, in 3
months, by the given order, we organised them alphabetically and numbered them
so that the claimer could easily find the searched-for manuscript by the notes
provided by us.�
Referring to Manvel Gyumushkhanetsi�s services at
Etchmiadzin�s library, an anonymous scribe, who prepared a fair copy of the
list, gives a bit more information (he was most likely one of Gyumushkhanetsi�s collaborators):
�In the year 1828 of our Lord, by order of the supreme Archbishop Nerses, the
head of the church, Manvel Vardapet put in order the library of the Mother See
of Holy Etchmiadzin. With the help of several literate clergymen of the
monastery, the library was cleaned from dust and useless trash; all the books
were organised alphabetically, labelled (as sermons, commentaries,
correspondence etc.) and numbered, so that the educated reader could easily
find them, as can be clearly seen from the list included herein.�
As can be concluded from the quotations, the
manuscripts of Etchmiadzin�s library were catalogued and numbered for the first
time in 1828. The separate materials included in the collections were
identified, brief annotations were prepared and attached to the sides of the
manuscripts.
The most important aspect of this activity in
Etchmiadzin�s library was that having been finally registered, the library�s
manuscripts had their catalogue, which though did not contribute much to
Armenian Studies but still gave some idea not only about the quantity of the
manuscripts but also about their content.
What value does the catalogue have today? Fortunately,
its rough and fair copies are preserved in MS N 3801 of Matenadaran, which
constitutes the complete collection of the manuscript lists of Etchmiadzin�s
library made in different periods.
In this catalogue, four groups (each numbered
separately) of 1809 manuscripts (which were in Etchmiadzin�s library during
that period) are enumerated in the following order:
a.
The Bible:
NN 1�25;
b.
Four
Gospels: NN 1�88 (in fact, the number of Gospels was 83 instead of 88, because
the figures 82�85 were accidently overlooked in the list);
c.
Menology:
NN 1�13;
d.
Other
manuscripts: NN 1�708, organised alphabetically according to content (the real
amount of manuscripts of this group is 1608 because manuscripts with the same
content are grouped and organised under a single number. So, for instance, 40
prayer books are listed under N 19, 19 mass books under N 86, 57 hymnals under N 428
and so forth) (columns 27�28).
The manuscripts are simply enumerated in the catalogue,
without any necessary bibliographical data. Only the dates of the manuscript
copying are given, but not in every case. The scribes and the places of copying
are also rarely specified. Only the main contents of the collections are
mentioned, according to preferences. Any categorization of the manuscripts is
completely out of question.
With this catalogue, today it is extremely difficult
to accurately determine which manuscripts those are and under which numbers they
are now kept at Matenadaran, especially because none of the numbers and
explanatory leaflets attached to the manuscripts by Manvel Gyumushkhanetsi have
survived. However, having used the limited bibliographical data included in the
catalogue, the notes and seals preserved in the manuscripts, and many other
means, it has been possible to identify the present-day numbers of 1642
manuscripts out of 1809 listed in the catalogue. Some of the other 167
manuscripts could still be in our Matenadaran, but the larger part and the more
valuable ones (the date, the place and the scribe of many, by the way, are
mentioned in the catalogue) we should consider as lost or look for them in the
manuscript collections of other libraries.
In the same year (1828), Manvel Gyumushkhanetsi also
made a catalogue of printed books of the library of Etchmiadzin, which is
entitled A List of Printed Books in
Alphabetical order. 2856 printed books on this list are mentioned under the
numbers 1�285 with very limited bibliographical data (place, date, etc.).
Aside from organizing the library of Etchmiadzin and
creating lists of manuscripts, Manvel Gyumushkhanetsi evidently made sure that
the manuscripts could not be taken out of the library without special
permission. This was not to the liking of many monks, who previously had
unrestricted access to them and took the manuscripts to their cells (which was
one of the main reasons for their loss and alienation).
Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants�s letter, written in 1829 in
response to the suggestion of Abraham Vardapet, a teacher from Bayazet,
contains such a hint. He had requested to be given an account of �worshiped holy
items� in the Mother See. �Please write to the
gracious Father Manvel,� Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants responded, �or to
someone who will not spare when asked for the necessary books.�
His efforts were also great with regard to collecting
manuscripts which belonged to the library of Etchmiadzin but had already been
alienated. In his work The Library of
Etchmiadzin Was Organized, we read that he had �found in the boxes of monks
four hundred eighty important and useful manuscripts which were organized
alphabetically.�
Manvel Gyumushkhanetsi also thought about finding and
returning manuscripts which were stolen from the library of Etchmiadzin during
the Russian-Persian war and were taken to Persia. In reference to this, he
writes in his above-mentioned work: �We learnt about rare books, which were
stolen from the maternal heart of this library and taken to Persia. We wanted
to send an envoy who would request the return of the books to their proper
place. But time disobeyed us. Now there are several boxes in Karabakh with
books from Tovma Vardapet, who was a legate in India and passed away in
Chisinau in 1828. The boxes are imprisoned in Karabakh and if an educated
patriot visits them, maybe it will be possible to get them back, just like a
separated child is returned to where he came from.�
This remarkable intention of his was never
accomplished because, as he puts it, �time disobeyed us.� Very soon he was
forced to not only abandon his position as the head of the library but also
leave Etchmiadzin for Sevan. In the future, as you will see, Gyumushkhanetsi�s
plan was partly fulfilled when, by orders of the catholicoi of those times,
several searches were made for the manuscripts formerly belonging to
Etchmiadzin, which had been taken to Persia and Karabakh (columns 29�30).
After Manvel Gyumushkhanetsi�s resignation from his
position as the head of the library and departure from Etchmiadzin, his
established order in the library unfortunately did not last long. As is
corroborated by A. Sedrakyan and A. Yeritsyan, very soon the library of
Etchmiadzin once again succumbed to �disorder and impropriety.�
In 1823�1833, for a short period of time (barely ten
years), Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants was assigned head of Etchmiadzin�s library
and printing house. In this short period, Shahkhatunyants obviously could not
have accomplished a lot, especially considering that the relationship between
the supporters of Nerses Ashtaraketsi (Shahkhatunyants was one of them) and
Catholicos Hovhannes Karbetsi was extremely strained. In his response to Baron
Rosen dated January 28, 1834, the Catholicos even blamed Shahkhatunyants for
the disorderly state of the library, writing that �Vardapet Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants,
the head and manager of the library and printing house, instead of improving
the state of affairs which had been assigned to him, because of idleness or
cunning unwillingness, started to ruin the order which had been established
before him.�
This accusation of Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants was
unfounded and resulted from the complete discontent that Karbetsi�s illegal
activities and imprudent deeds had brought about. It is known that Hovhannes
Shahkhatunyants was one of the few learnt vardapets and, as you will see
shortly afterwards, his contribution, not only to the library of Etchmiadzin
but also to the mission of collecting Armenian manuscript treasures, was
considerable. Still, the above-mentioned �accusation� once again confirms the
fact that indeed, after the departure of Manvel Gyumushkhanetsi, the library
was once again in an extremely dire state, a circumstance that Karbetsi used for accusing
and punishing the vardapet who had disrespected him.
That the library was indeed in an extremely poor state
is also confirmed by the fact that when Nicholas I visited Etchmiadzin in 1837,
the rich library of the monastery was not shown to him �because the books were
haphazardly laid in boxes and kept in the dressing room covered with dust.�
In 1837, by order of the Synod, Hovhannes
Shahkhatunyants was assigned to create a catalogue of printed and handwritten
books of the library. In 1833, while Shahkhatunyants was still the head of
Etchmiadzin�s library and printing house and noticed that Manvel Gyumushkhanetsi�s
catalogue was incomplete, he made an alphabetical list of the books which had
been left out of it in 1828. This catalogue was entitled �The list of works
which corresponded to the numbers of the first list but were not alphabetically
organised among them, because having been incorporated in clusters, they were
left out of the alphabetical order. For that reason, they have now been taken
out of the catalogue, organized alphabetically and included separately in this
small list with the numbers of those books where they can be found. February
1833.�
The need to create a new list apparently did not arise
so much due to Gyumushkhanetsi�s catalogue being incomplete (as you will see
below, the list made by Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants in 1837 barely differs from
the previous one) but rather because the 931 manuscripts acquired during the
previous 9 years (1828�1837), without being duly processed, without their
contents being studied, and without even being properly numbered, were randomly
scattered in various corners in a very desolate state.��
Shahkhatunyants created a catalogue which he entitled
�A List of Books of the Library of the Mother See, Made in 1837.� This list, in
an unorganised manner, gives a simple (columns 31�32) enumeration of the 2740
handwritten and 2298 printed books which were available at Etchmiadzin�s
library in 1837, without bibliographical information. Not even the consecutive numbers
of the manuscripts are given. As to the state of the manuscripts, they still
remained partially in boxes and partially on the floor.
In May 1838, on Hovhannes Karbetsi�s invitation, the senator
Baron Hahn visited Etchmiadzin to be present at the Blessing of the Holy Chrism
on June 5. During this visit he got closely acquainted with the daily lives of
the clergy, inquired into the state of the library and the manuscripts and
asked the Catholicos, insisted in fact, that the library be organized in a few
days and that the manuscripts be taken out of the boxes and arranged in a
fire-proof room. At the same time, he raised the question of urgently preparing
a catalogue of manuscripts and providing him with a copy.
At Baron Hahn�s request, Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants and
Hovhannes Khrimetsi created a catalogue in a few days and gave him a copy.�
As to what a catalogue made in a few days could look
like and what academic value it could have, is clear in itself.�
This is the catalogue that Baron Hahn took with him to
St. Petersburg and delivered to academician Brosset who published its Russian
and French translations in 1840.
This bilingual catalogue, prepared by Hovhannes
Shahkhatunyants and published by Brosset, which, by the way, should simply be
considered a revised version of the one made in 1837, did not have a particular
academic value.
Kerovbe Patkanian, referring to the academic significance
of the catalogue, incidentally noted: �Of course, the publication of such a
list could not please anyone.�
Despite all its flaws, however, for the first time the
catalogue drew scholars� attention to the manuscript treasures of the library
of Etchmiadzin, and as such, it is worthy of appreciation.
The catalogue was thematic and contained 353
manuscripts and 167 printed books, with no bibliographical data. The numbers of
the library were not mentioned either. With this catalogue, the interested
individual could learn what material there was in general but could never
determine in which manuscripts and how many copies were available. From then
on, the catalogue stirred great interest towards the manuscript treasures of
Etchmiadzin�s library, and its incompleteness necessitated the preparation of a
more comprehensive and detailed list. Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants, thanks to the
exhortations of Brosset and others, undertook this mission.
In 1848, Brosset visited Etchmiadzin and stayed there
for 40 days. He got closely acquainted with the monastery of Etchmiadzin, its
relics, as well as the handwritten and printed books of the library. During
that time Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants had already started creating the so-called
comprehensive and detailed catalogue of the manuscripts of Etchmiadzin�s
library and had already made the lists of Bibles, Gospels and manuscripts
containing historical material, which, together with others, were provided to
Brosset with unlimited permission to access the manuscripts.
Brosset wrote that 4 different catalogues were put at
his disposal: two general (namely, the list prepared by Gyumushkhanetsi in 1828
and that of Shahkhatunyants created in 1837) and two specific (namely, the
unfinished thematic catalogues of Shahkhatunyants). In this regard, by the way,
Brosset was highly critical of Wagner who claimed that �the published catalogue
was insufficient and the monks did not declare everything.� Brosset noted that
the monks were not obliged to show everything to every visitor (columns 33�34).
At the same time, referring to the valuable
manuscripts of Etchmiadzin�s library, Brosset remarked that after the library
of the Mekhitarist Congregation in Venice, Etchmiadzin�s matenadaran was the
richest in Armenian literature, followed by the library of Paris, the library
of the Mekhitarist Congregation in Vienna, the Royal Library of Vienna and
finally that of Vatican.�
With the help of Shahkhatunyants, Brosset translated on
the spot the latter�s above-mentioned thematic lists into French, which he then
published with a special study in Saint-Petersburg (1849) in his work entitled
�Rapports sur un voyage
archéologique��
Brosset highly appreciated Shahkhatunyants�s
undertaken work and expected it to be accomplished some day so that he could
publish it. On this occasion, in his letter addressed to Shahkhatunyants on
August 14, 1848, he wrote: �You know how I appreciated your fine work on a
detailed description of the handwritten books of Etchmiadzin�s library, with
the list of historical writings and biblical manuscripts having been completed.
Of course it is your property and without your permission no one can use it.
But I hope that for your own sake and for the glory of your motherland you
would not refuse to send me the full or partial catalogue, once it is ready.�
The anticipated catalogue of manuscripts which,
according to Brosset, Shahkhatunyants had already begun in 1837, remained
unfinished. The reason is not known. Perhaps it was Shahkhatunyants�s illness
(as Brosset believed) or his extreme occupation with various activities, or the
fact that when Nerses Ashtaraketsi became catholicos, he did not deal with the
library�s condition at all and completely neglected it (as is corroborated by
Shahkhatunyants�s biographer A. Sedrakyan).
On this occasion, he writes: �We could rightly expect
that the person who paid attention to the library as archbishop already in 1828
(referring to Manvel Gyumushkhanetsi�s catalogue made by his order), would perfectly
improve its condition during his patriarchy. However, for reasons
incomprehensible to us, the Great Patriarch neglected Etchmiadzin�s library.�
MS N 3801 of Matenadaran, which, as we have already
mentioned, is a collection of different lists of manuscripts, contains the originals
of those sections of the so-called comprehensive and detailed list (created and
uncompleted by Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants), which were published by Brosset in
1849 in St. Petersburg.
This
catalogue, which is entitled �A Comprehensive List of the Books of the Library
of the Mother See of Etchmiadzin and All the Sections and Authors Contained in
the Same Collections�, consists of two separate registers. The first register
includes the Holy Scriptures (the Bible and the Gospels) while the second
contains historical material. The following material is described:
a. The Bible: NN 1�33.
b. Four Gospels: NN 28�164 (in fact, 136 Gospel manuscripts are described,
since N 68 has been skipped).
c. Historiography: NN 1�63.
Out of the 232 manuscripts described, 221 are today in
Matenadaran; 7 of the missing 11 manuscripts were Gospels and the other 4 were
highly valuable historiographic works, which, according to a source, were taken
from the library by Karapet Vardapet Shahnazaryan and never returned.
To form an idea about the description method of
manuscripts on this list, it will suffice to mention that it literally
resembles the �General Catalogue� prepared by Daniel Vardapet Shahnazaryan and
published by Hakob Karenyants in 1863 in Tbilisi (columns 35�36).
The following substantial difference can be observed
when comparing the above-mentioned catalogue created by Shahkhatunyants with
that of Brosset published in St. Petersburg (1849) in the report about his
trip. The number of Bibles on Brosset�s list is 27, while Shahkhatunyants has
33. The number of Gospels is 30 and 136 accordingly, whereas there are 63
historiographic works on both lists.�
It should be assumed that Shahkhatunyants completed
his catalogue of Holy Scriptures after 1848. The list was unfinished during
Brosset�s visit to Etchmiadzin and after its finalization he did not have the
chance to use it.
That indeed Shahkhatunyants�s catalogue (just like the
previous one) and the one published by Brosset in 1849 were incomplete and did
not have particular academic value is also confirmed by the fact that when the
crown prince Alexander visited Etchmiadzin in 1850 and got acquainted with the
manuscript treasures kept at the library, he stated the need to have systematic
and orderly lists of manuscripts.
However, Nerses Ashtaraketsi, who, as we have already
once noted, for unknown reasons had not paid attention to the matter, also
ignored the crown prince Alexander�s remark.
Together with pointing out that the manuscript catalogues
were incomplete and non-academic, we must acknowledge Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants�s
significant contribution as the head of the library (1833�1834, 1837�1849) not
only to Etchmiadzin�s library in general but also to collecting Armenian
manuscripts in particular.
Already in 1838, when he visited the Diocese of Shamakh
as the patriarch�s envoy to organize an eparchial consistory, he received a
special order from Catholicos Hovhannes Karbetsi to obtain manuscripts for
Etchmiadzin�s library. Unfortunately, it is unknown how many manuscripts he
acquired and from where. In 1847, by Nerses Ashtaraketsi�s order, he left for
Tiflis to purchase manuscripts from booksellers.� Next year, in 1848, thanks to his vigorous
efforts, a substantial part of the manuscripts of the St. Stepanos
Nakhavka (Proto-martyr) Monastery (Maghardavank) were brought
to Etchmiadzin, including the famous
Gospels with an ivory cover.
With regard to moving the manuscripts of Maghardavank to Etchmiadzin,
A. Sedrakyan wrote: �For an unknown reason, the sent vardapet (Makar Vardapet
Ter-Petrosyan) did not take all of the manuscripts from the monastery�s rich
library to Etchmiadzin. To this day, part of the remaining manuscripts are
rotting and being eaten by moths where they were left, while another part has
already been alienated and is in the hands of others.�
Our Matenadaran houses the monastery�s catalogue of handwritten and
printed books compiled by Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants. 125 handwritten and 98 printed books
are included in this catalogue entitled: �These are the books of the Saint
Nakhavka Monastery, listed by name�. 69 manuscripts were brought to Matenadaran
in 1848, one in 1868, another in 1893. The remaining 54, as it can be concluded
from A. Sedrakyan�s testimony, have either been destroyed or alienated.
The following are the current numbers of the 71
manuscripts included in the catalogue, which are now in Matenadaran:� 33, 82, 93, 104, 117, 141, 142, 164, 192,
226, 254, 287, 302, 309, 327, 328, 339, 340, 359, 369, 382, 387, 472, 542, 543,
618, 619, 634, 635, 648, 680, 780, 864, 914, 947�976, 983�985, 987, 1144, 1158,
1322, 1337, 1352, 1353, 1362, 1501�1504, 1512, 1513, 1516, 1517, 1558�1561,
1568,1569, 1658, 1748. 1957, 2196, 2331�2333, 2374, 2380, 2673, 3139 (the last
two manuscripts have been included in the Gevorgyan collection � the first
since 1868 and the second since 1893).
As we have seen, Nerses Ashtaraketsi neglected the
crown prince Alexander�s suggestion to improve Etchmiadzin�s library and to
create systematic and academic lists of manuscripts. During his three-year tenure
(1849�1851) as the head of the library, Makar Teghuttsi, too, did not
accomplish much in terms of organising the library (columns 37�38).
This state of affairs remained unchanged until 1858
when Matteos K. Polsetsi became Catholicos, finding the library �in a
confused state�, so that �everyone�s heart ached with compassion at the sight
of it�.
When the crown prince Alexander ascended the throne in
1855, he once again focused his attention on Etchmiadzin�s library. On
September 9, 1860, Kruzinshtern, the
administrator of the Viceroy of Caucasus, addressed Catholicos Matteos in a letter: �During the Emperor�s
visit to Etchmiadzin, it has pleased His Highness to take notice of the
collection of books and manuscripts in the monastery, which remain unknown and
of no use to research due to a disorderly and unorganised state. Among them are
treasures not only of Armenian but also of other Eastern literature and
history. In order to make them known, His Imperial Highness commands that an expert
be selected, who will classify the manuscripts and printed books of
Etchmiadzin�s monastery according to language and content, prepare systematic
lists, underline the oldest and most content-rich examples and send such lists
to the Ministry of Public Education.
It is a strange, yet undeniable truth that during
those years foreign intellectuals and state officials showed more interest in
the manuscript treasures of Etchmiadzin�s library than the clergy of
Etchmiadzin. And if ever attempts were made to bring the library to an orderly
state, it was always at the instigation of foreigners and as a temporary
measure.
Referring
to the reasons why foreigners were interested in Etchmiadzin�s library,
Kerovbe Patkanyan writes: �Among Armenian libraries, Etchmiadzin�s monastery
undoubtedly is the most significant. The monastery�s library has long been
famous for highly regarded thanks to its rich and diverse manuscripts. This
reputation has led many to believe that such an old and renowned monastery
could house not only Armenian but also foreign manuscripts, and this assumption
would certainly urge many to get more closely acquainted with the manuscripts.
But these aspirations could not have come true for a long time for the simple
reason that in Etchmiadzin, as well as in all of Armenia, libraries as such had
long ceased to exist. Instead, there was a sort of repository, where
manuscripts and books were haphazardly piled upon one another, suffering from
humidity, mice and especially the neglectful attitude of their guardians. And
throughout centuries there had hardly been anyone who could have known exactly
what was in the library�.
The
above-mentioned order of Emperor Alexander II obliged Catholicos Matteos I to
seriously deal with the organization of Etchmiadzin�s library. On September 30,
1860, by Order N 1845 of the Synod, Daniel Vardapet Shahnazaryan was appointed
head of the library and assigned to take care of its organization and the
preparation of an orderly catalogue. Daniel Shahnazaryan was aided by Andreas
Vardapet Vehapetyan and Sukias Vardapet Parzyan, assistant Hakob Sarkavag
Syunetsi and secretary Nikoghayos Ter-Hovsepyan. In his note N 500 of October
9, 1860, Catholicos Matteos I communicated the news of the appointment to the
general affairs manager of the Viceroy of Caucasus, informing him that by the
supreme order, the organization of the library and the cataloguing of the
manuscripts had already began.
Indeed, in
a short period of time, the library was put in order. Hakob Karenyants, who
visited Etchmiadzin in 1861 and had a closer (columns 39�40) look at the
library, writes the following: �We have heard countless times about the
miserable state of Etchmiadzin�s library, they even said that snakes and
scorpions had nested inside the manuscripts. But I have witnessed quite the
opposite. Therefore, fellow Armenians, ignore the negative rumors and for the
first time listen to good tidings. Etchmiadzin�s library, a magnificent stone
building adjacent to the residence of the Catholicos, is divided into two major
halls with clean and luminous windows. Inside these rooms, new and beautiful
full-height shelves with individual locks made of red wood are installed. They
contain all the books: while in the first hall you can find printed books, the
second one houses the rare treasures of our nation � our manuscripts. I
examined several very large books and did not find any humidity or dust, much
less snakes or scorpions.�
The catalogue was completed at the end of December
1861 and it was presented to the Catholicos on January 10, 1862. In May 1863,
the Catholicos sent the catalogue to Tbilisi, to Hakob Karenyants, who had
promised to publish it at his own expense during his visit to Etchmiadzin in
1861. Karenyants fulfilled his promise and by the end of 1863 published the
catalogue which to this day is known as �The Karenyants Catalogue�.
The original catalogue, which is now kept in our
Matenadaran�s collection of Armenian manuscripts under the number 4570, has the
following title page: �General Manuscript Catalogue of the Library of the
Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin; by Order of the Catholicos of All Armenians
Ter-Ter Matteos, the God-Chosen Patriarch and the Knight of Two Empires,
Russian and Ottoman. Compiled by Daniel Vardapet Shahnazaryants Taronetsi and
Andreas Vardapet Kostandnupolsetsi from the Congregation of Holy Etchmiadzin.
Holy Etchmiadzin, 1862�.
All the 2338 manuscripts, which were once at
Etchmiadzin�s library, are described on the original list under the numbers
1�2331. The noticeable difference of 7 numbers between these two figures is
caused by the following mistakes: firstly, NN 1115 and 1333 have been skipped
over (-2); secondly, 7 manuscripts included between numbers 1209�1210,
1239�1240, 1297�1298, 1593�1594, 1730�1731, 2230�2231, 2287�2288 were not
numbered (+7); finally, numbers 1413 and 2123 are repeated (+2). The
manuscripts that figure on this list correspond to those included in
Karenyants� printed version. In the printed version, 2338 manuscripts are under
the numbers 1�2340. The difference of 2 numbers is the result of the following
mistakes: numbers 1593 and 1594 are repeated (+2); the current manuscripts NN
1902 and 1921 have been given duplicate numbers on Karenyants� list: 1680, 1681
and 1791, 1792; lastly, numbers 1976 and 2309 have been skipped over (-2).
2333 from the above-mentioned 2338 manuscripts are now
in our Matenadaran (in fact, the actual number of manuscripts is 2334 because
volumes I and II of N 43 (Karenyants� list) are now presented as separate items
under numbers 374 and 375. One of the missing 5 manuscripts (number 334,
according to Karenyants) was gifted in 1880 to Emperor Alexander II by
Catholicos Gevorg IV on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of his
coronation. The other 4 (1659, 1660, 1734, 2031, as per Karenyants� list) were
considered lost already in 1892. This fact is communicated by the head of the
library, Sahak Amatuni, in his explanatory note to the Synod dated August 28,
1892. It is also corroborated by the record of December 14, 1897 (columns 41�42),
when the newly-appointed head of the library, Garegin Hovsepyan, accepted the
manuscripts from the former head of the library, Sahak Amatuni.
The following are the current numbers of the 2333 (in
reality, 2334) manuscripts in Matenadaran, described on Karenyants� list: NN
1�46, 48�54, 58�96, 98�136, 138�189, 191�432, 434�487, 489, 491�504, 506�551,
553�555, 557�777, 779�831, 833�858, 860�912, 914�977, 979�1005, 1007�1017,
1019�1047, 1049�1112, 1117�1170, 1174�1212, 1214�1241, 1245�1257, 1259�1307,
1309, 1310, 1312�1476, 1478�1497, 1500�1653, 1637�1652, 1654�1791, 1793, 1794,
1796�1850, 1852�1912, 1914�1986, 1988�2228, 2230�2374, 2380�2382, 3777, 7345.
Even though the �General Catalogue�, compiled by
Daniel Vardapet Shahnazaryan and published by Karenyants, has many flaws and
mistakes, it is, nevertheless, the only complete published list that summarizes
the old part of the rich collection of Etchmiadzin�s library.
It is pointless to blame Daniel Shahnazaryan for the
catalogue�s flaws because it was virtually the first attempt of this kind and
was only backed by Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants� and Manvel Gyumushkhanetsi�
similar endeavours.
It seems that the head of the library Daniel
Shahnazaryan did not establish a very strict order inside the institution. Understandably,
under those circumstances stealing of manuscripts was also a possibility, not
only at the hands of the enemy, but also �by the librarians themselves�.
Because of this negligence, only 2338 manuscripts were left in the library in
1862, i. e. 402 units less than the 2740 manuscripts the library had according
to Shahkhatunyants� list compiled in 1837 (not counting those that could have
been acquired over the years).
In
this regard, Kerovbe Patkanian wrote years later: �Until the middle of this century,
manuscripts were being stolen and the best copies, in terms of content and
aesthetic value, were circulating from hand to hand. Even today, many private
and public collections bear the traces of Etchmiadzin�s seal. The oldest copies
of the histories of Kaghankatvatsi and Sebeos, which were in the monastery�s
library in the 50s, are no longer there, as I personally checked in 1877 during
my visit to Etchmiadzin.�
In
the following 5 years (1863�1867), thanks to Grigor Vardapet Musheghyan�s
service as the head of the library, Etchmiadzin�s collection of Armenian
manuscripts was enriched with other 44 items (the amount of manuscripts
actually equals 45 because the current NN 1498 and 1499, as volumes I and II of
the same work, were registered under N 1796). In the beginning of 1868, the
number of manuscripts reached 2382 (2383).
Here are the current numbers of the 44 (45)
manuscripts acquired in a five-year period (1863�1867): NN 47, 55�57, 97, 137,
190, 433, 488, 490, 505, 552, 556, 778, 832, 859, 913, 1006, 1018, 1048,
1113�1116, 1171�1173, 1213, 1242�1244, 1258, 1308, 1311, 1477, 1498, 1499,
1636, 1653, 1792, 1795, 1851, 1913, 1987, 2229.
The incorporation of the mentioned 44 (45)
newly-acquired manuscripts into the catalogue significantly disturbed the order
of numbers on Karenyants� list and resulted in numerous errors. The problem was
that instead of having been numbered in a way that would necessarily continue
Karenyants� list, they were categorized thematically and alphabetically and
integrated in the corresponding sections. In order to put an end to this chaos
(which, by the way, lasted for about two decades), in 1892 Sahak Amatuni, the
head of the library, renumbered the manuscripts from beginning to end, made
rearrangements and compiled a brief catalogue (columns 43�44). On this
occasion, in his declaration (dated August 28, 1892) addressed to the Synod,
Amatuni writes: �After tormenting my morbid self there, in the cells of the
library in order to change the numbers of all manuscripts, which were printed
and glued on their covers, I alone also compiled this catalogue, which I
present to the Synod for consideration, so that every librarian should keep
this numbering in the future�.
However, it is fair to mention that in the 70s (most
likely in 1878), a similar undertaking was also completed by the head of the
library, Nerses Vardapet Khudaverdyan. But because of the lack of an
appropriate catalogue, his work produced no results.
Thus, the manuscript collection of Etchmiadzin�s
library ended up with two catalogues, each numbered totally differently.
A. The printed �General Catalogue� by Hakob Karenyants:
NN 1�2340.
B.
The
newly renumbered brief catalogue by Sahak Amatuni: NN 1�2383.
The first one is known in philology as the �General
Catalogue� or the �Karenyants Catalogue�, while the second one is introduced as
the catalogue �of Etchmiadzin�, �Etchmiadzin�s manuscripts� or �Etchmiadzin�s
library�. Its numbers are referred to as �Etchmiadzin�s old numbers� since
1913, when the �Gevorgyan� and several other collections were grouped and
numbered accordingly. It should be noted that these names were often confused
with each other, something that was inevitable, considering that the same work
had three different numbers. So, it was extremely difficult, if not impossible,
to find a given manuscript, especially because additional bibliographical
information was missing. The task was also difficult since the numbers of
Karenyants� catalogue were not preserved on any of the manuscripts.
In literature (in Garegin Hovsepyan�s works, among
others), both numbers are frequently listed together in fraction form:
Karenyants� number in the numerator and that of Amatuni in the denominator, or
the other way around. From 1913 on, it is also possible to find the following
fraction form: Amatuni�s number (sometimes together with that of Karenyants) in
the numerator and the current number in the denominator.
It is worth mentioning that only the manuscripts
included in Karenyants� and Amatuni�s catalogues are part of �The Collection of
Etchmiadzin�s Library� or simply �Etchmiadzin�s Collection�, and should not be
confused with a number of highly valuable collections that were added to
Etchmiadzin�s library in the following fifty years (1868�1913). These were
grouped and numbered not earlier than 1913, as already mentioned, and are known
in philology by their previous �addresses.� These catalogues will be discussed
later on.
As it has been noted, in the beginning of 1868,
Etchmiadzin�s library had 2382 manuscripts (2383 according to Amatuni, because
volumes I and II of NN 43 and 1796 are now registered accordingly under NN 374,
375 and 1498, 1499 (+2), while manuscript N 276 (N 269, as per Karenyants),
which had been lost, was erroneously registered under N 371 (-1) once found,
instead of being reassigned its previous number. Matenadaran received 2378
manuscripts out of those 2383. One of the 5 remaining manuscripts, N 341 (N
334, as per Karenyants� list), was gifted to Emperor Alexander II by Catholicos
Gevorg IV on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of his coronation.
The other 4: NN 1701, 1702, 1776, 1796 (NN 1659, 1660, 1734, 2031 on
Karenyants� list), as already stated in relation to Karenyants� catalogue, were
already lost in 1892.
The aforesaid 2378 manuscripts of Etchmiadzin�s former
library have the following current numbers in our Matenadaran: NN 1�997,
979�2374, 2380�2382, 3777, 7345 (the last two are some of the few manuscripts
which had been alienated and later returned to Matenadaran).
In order to give complete information about
Etchmiadzin�s main collection, we should add that 48 folios from MS N 263 (N
352 and N 359, according to Karenyants and Amatuni respectively) (columns 45�46)
were brought to Matenadaran in 1938 (N 209 in the 1938 collection) and received
the number 8690. It is not known when and where the folios got separated from
the manuscript. In 1960, the 48 folios were reunited with it.�
Unfortunately, there is no specific information with
regard to how the collection of Etchmiadzin�s library was enriched. As we have
seen, it has a long history with ups and downs. However, just like the
different Armenian manuscript collections around the world (Jerusalem, Venice,
Vienna, New Julfa, etc.), our Matenadaran�s collection as well (including its
core: the rich collection of Etchmiadzin�s former library), as Brosset puts it,
�came together little by little, without major difficulties, thanks to the
donations of clergymen and secular people, as well as the merging of the
collections of the monasteries which are now in ruins.�
Here we first of all mean the manuscripts which were
written or copied by Etchmiadzin�s clergymen in loco, i. e. at Etchmiadzin. Secondly, we should include those
which were copied in other places at the request of monks or by order of the
catholicoi specifically for Etchmiadzin�s library. Thirdly, we should take into
account the donations of not only clergymen but also of believers, as well as
the manuscripts that were brought from different monasteries and churches.
It is impossible to determine the components and the
current numbers of a collection which slowly accumulated in four hundred twenty
years (1441�1862). It is impossible especially because, having been repeatedly
subjected to plunder and destruction, the number of manuscripts at the library
decreased. In peaceful times, when the manuscripts were gathered and
intermixed, they lost the traces of their former belonging. It is also
difficult since the library was in no habit of marking in separate registers
from where, how and when the manuscripts were acquired. Only in rare cases such
information can be found in books, which is extremely insufficient for
uncovering the layers of the library�s rich collection.
As we have mentioned, Etchmiadzin�s library first of
all included the manuscripts copied in Etchmiadzin. Today, there are 321
manuscripts copied in Etchmiadzin among the Armenian manuscript collections of
various museums around the world, 101 of which are in the collection of
Etchmiadzin�s library: NN 2, 25, 26, 31, 47, 59, 75, 109, 111, 119, 126, 131,
138, 205, 350, 399, 435, 442, 444, 446, 450, 464, 499, 509, 637, 664, 873, 930,
978, 1002, 1056, 1072, 1073, 1088, 1162, 1212, 1221, 1222, 1224, 1226, 1228,
1278, 1350, 1405, 1423, 1425, 1441, 1446, 1458, 1512, 1532-1534, 1549, 1674, 1678,
1691, 1703, 1708, 1740, 1754, 1801, 1804, 1808, 1813, 1817, 1822, 1825, 1826,
1833, 1835, 1837, 1841, 1891, 1894, 1900, 1917, 1927, 1934, 1972, 1993, 2000,
2027, 2096, 2124, 2162, 2186, 2216, 2220, 2222, 2224, 2228, 2263, 2286, 2289,
2309, 2319, 2377, 2340, 2356.
After Etchmiadzin, the second largest part of
manuscripts in the collection is from Hovhannavank. For centuries, Hovhannavank
was considered a significant scriptorium and intellectual centre. Today we have
manuscripts that were copied there between the 11th and 18th
centuries (not counting the intervals). Hovhannavank played an especially
important role from the second quarter of the 17th century when,
after the destructive Russian-Turkish war, a long period of peace was
established in the country. This was �the time of Catholicos Movses Syunetsi (1623�1632)�, as Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants writes, �who after renovating all the
buildings ... took care of erecting a school at the holy monastery of Hovhannavank. He gathered pupils and appointed
as their teacher Melikset Vardapet who had come there from the Monastery of Lim�. The subsequent catholicoi also did not neglect
Hovhannavank, thanks to which for a long time (columns 47�48) it remained one
of the cultural centres of Armenia.
Unfortunately, it is impossible to determine which
manuscripts belonged to the monastery and how many there were. In general, very
few manuscripts copied in Hovhannavank have reached us (around 20 manuscripts,
15 of which are now in Matenadaran). 12 out of 15 have been included in
Etchmiadzin�s collection and have been numbered thusly: 152, 380, 541, 1316,
1363, 1404, 1479, 1522, 1526, 1531, 1660, 1662.
69 manuscripts from the St. Stepanos
Nakhavka Monastery
(Maghardavank) of Darashamb are also part of Etchmiadzin�s collection. We
have already mentioned their numbers and noted that those manuscripts were brought to Etchmiadzin in 1848 by Makar Vardapet
Ter-Petrosyan, thanks to the efforts of Hovhannes Shahkhatunyants.
Sadly, it is unknown what manuscripts from other
monasteries were included in Etchmiadzin�s library. However, a piece of
information is provided by Makar Teghuttsi�s biographer, according to which,
�part of the current manuscripts of Holy Etchmiadzin�s library have been
acquired by the Patriarch from the cells of Iran�s [he means the manuscripts
brought from Darashamb � O. Y.] and Russia�s different monasteries�. Thus it
can be concluded that the collection also contained manuscripts from Georgia,
Nor Nakhijevan and Bessarabia. Though there is no written record of this, it
can be assumed that they must have been the 44 manuscripts left out of
Karenyants� list, which were brought to Etchmiadzin in 1863�1867. This
assumption is based on the fact that the period coincides with Makar
Teghuttsi�s leadership of the Diocese of Georgia and Imereti.
Donations of religious and secular individuals are a
considerable part of the collection of Etchmiadzin but unfortunately we don�t
have information about many of them. The following are the names of the
individuals and the current numbers of those donated manuscripts about which we
have information (columns 49-50).
List A
Etchmiadzin�s Main Collection
Abghutyan Hovsep, 1801 � 6 (NN 530, 924, 1092, 1093, 1287, 2081). The 9 manuscripts of Hovsep
Abghutyan were included in the Gevorgyan Collection (see List B)
Grigor Vardapet, 1811 � (N 1002)
Catholicos Yeprem, 1809�1827 � 7 (NN 372, 413, 453,
460, 462, 1017, 1213)
Zakaria Yepiskopos Oshakantsi, 1808 � 1 (NN 1706)
Tadeos Vardapet �
1 (N 486)
Taghiadyan Mesrop � 1 (NN 2021)
Tovmas Vardapet, 1811 � 6 (NN 1003, 1005, 1006, 1021,
1134, 1146)
Izmirlyants Matteos � 1 (N 980); two manuscripts were
included in the Gevorgyan Collection (See List B)
Khndryan � Papazyan Stepannos, Constantinople, 1859 �
1 (N 1496)
Korganov Ivan � 1 (N 986)
Hovhannes Hamadantsi, Tabriz � 1 (N 429)
Hovhannes Vardapet Vanahayr, St. Gayane Monastery,
1862 � 1 (N 1016)
Manvel Vardapet Gyumushkhanetsi, 1831 � 1 (N 1163)
Minas Tiratsu Nakhijevantsi, 1812 � 1 (N 454)
Reteos Vardapet, 1795 � 5 (NN 1201, 1233, 1255, 1365,
1391)
Ter-Grigoryan Maghakia, Constantinople, 1859 � 3 (NN
1009-1011)
Philippos Vardapet, 1812 � 1 (N 1282)