The state-authorized religion, however, did take root in the country, and became inextricably interwoven with the self-consciousness of the nation. It became the organ of national expression, and for many centuries has been the very backbone of the people. If the molten metals of national life had hardened during the reign of the Arsacidae kings they were at the time of the conversion in a molten state, ready to be remolded. This did not require much time. Old festivals were carried over intact, except that they were given a new meaning. The old national traditions, legends, and folk-lore were in the common possession of the people, and there was no reason for discouraging them. In fact the Armenian church even more than the state encouraged them, for it recognized in them a source of solidarity and national unity, as essential to the life of the church as its hierarchies, liturgy, and calendar of saints. So much then was old; part of the past carried over into the present to be carried over into the future. What then was new? First the legends and traditions, already mentioned, imbedded in the immediately past events of the new order. Legends of Abgar, of Gregory, of Thaddeus, of Rhipsime, of Tiridates, passed like magic fire from person to person, creating a common sentiment which made the foundations of the new church absolutely secure. How firmly this foundation was established is indicated by the reaction of the church to the decisions at the Council of Chalcedon, where the dogma of the dual nature of Christ was affirmed, in perfect contradiction to the Nicæan dogma, and by the reaction against the Persian proposals to accept fire-worship as the state religion.
I shall consider the second point first. As already stated, the year 428 marked the end of the Armenian Arsacid dynasty. The nation was divided between Persia and Rome at this time, largely as a result of internal dissensions. In the year 450 the Persian king sent a letter to the Armenian princes, setting forth the excellence of fire-worship and the foolishness of Christianity, and summoned the Armenians to accept the Persian religion.[42] A council of bishops and laymen was held and a reply of unanimous refusal was drawn up. “From this faith no one can move us, neither angels nor men, neither sword nor fire, nor water, nor any deadly punishment.”[43] A rather impertinent reply from a subject nation to one which dominated it; but thoroughly characteristic of the Armenians. The Persians did use fire and sword, and defeated the Armenians in the plain of Avarair under Mount Ararat (451). But they did not gain their end. An old historian wrote of the battle, “swords of slayers grew dull, but their necks were not weary,” and the Persian high priest having seen the utter hopelessness of his project wrote, “these people have put on Christianity, not like a garment, but like flesh and blood.”[44]
Already, only one hundred fifty years after the conversion, the foundation of the church was secure. This of course was made possible by the completeness of the work of its founders; but this in itself would not have been sufficient. A common favorable sentiment had been created, which grew up under the natural conditions of life, and inasmuch as the legends described are part of the common beliefs of the people, it may be inferred that they played an important rôle in the formation of this sentiment. The church, on the other hand, has incorporated these legendary beliefs in its ritual and ceremony, and in that way has given them the necessary sanction by which they are passed on from generation to generation. They thus form part of the permanent social tradition of the Armenian people.
The security of the church at this early time (450) was indicated not only by the reaction of the nation to the Persian proposals of fire-worship, but also by the reaction to the decision of the Council of Chalcedon, at which, as stated, the dual nature of Christ was dogmatically affirmed, in contradiction to the dogma established at the Council of Nicæa (325), accepted by the Armenian church. But at the time of the Chalcedonian council, the Persian difficulties were taking place, the battle of Avarair having occurred during the same year, and it was not until 491 that the Armenians held a synod of their own which assembled at Vagharshapat, in order to take decisive action.[45] The decisions of the Council of Chalcedon were rejected and the action was repeated at subsequent synods. Of the three sees or patriarchates, the Roman at Rome, the Greek at Alexandria, and the Byzantine at Constantinople, the latter was gaining in power, and it was at the Council of Chalcedon that the precedence of the see of Constantinople was recognized. Naturally, neither the Roman nor Greek sees acknowledged the decision of the council, but later both Greek and Latin churches revoked their opposition, and recognized it as the fourth Œcumenic Council. But the Armenian church would have nothing to do with Chalcedon, in spite of Greek and Latin approval, and since that time she has stood alone, absolutely independent of Greek and Latin churches. Ormanian states: “She set herself to resist every new dogmatic utterance said to emanate from revelation, as well as any innovation which could in any way pervert the primitive faith.”[46] The “primitive faith” may be a slight stretch of point, but the fact that the Armenian church adopted an absolutely independent policy, which separated her from all other Christian churches, and to which she has steadfastly adhered in spite of persistent Greek and Latin influence and efforts at domination, is in clear support of my assertion that the social foundations of the church were firmly and securely established as early as 450, only one hundred fifty years after the work of Gregory and Tiridates.
[1] Clark, New Englander 22:507, 672. Raffi p. 127.
[2] That trees are worshipped even to-day, and that certain superstitions are bound up with them is clearly shown by Abeghian. “In den Gegenden Armeniens, wo das Land mit Wäldern bedeckt ist, werden viele sehr alte und grosse Bäume für heilig gehalten und ähnlicher Weise wie die Quellen verehrt. Man brennt vor ihnen Lichter. Weihrauch, opfert ihnen Hähne und Hammel, küsst sie, kriecht durch ihren gespaltenen Stamm durch, oder lässt magere Kinder durch ihre Löcher schlüpfen, um die Einwirkung der bosen Geister aufzuheben. Man glaubt dass vom Himmel Lichter auf die heiligen Bäume kommen, oder Heilige sich auf denselben aufhalten. Auch die Bäume geben Gesundheit, einige heilen alle Krankheiten.... Um von Bäumen Heilung zu bekommen soll man ein Stück von seiner Kleidung abreissen und damit den Baum umwickeln oder es auf den Baum nageln. Man glaubt dadurch seine Krankheit auf den Baum zu übertragen.” Abeghian pp. 58, 59.
[3] Agathangelus p. 127. Emin, Recherches sur le Paganisme Arménien p. 9.
[4] Raffi, article in Boyadjian’s Armenian Legends and Poetry.
[5] Tir is mentioned only once by Agathangelus (p. 164) and he is not mentioned by any other Armenian writers (Langlois 1:164). Emin compares him to the Greek Hermes or Mercury, probably because Agathangelus speaks of him as the recorder or reporter of Aramazd. (Emin p. 20, note 1.)