DOI: 10.24412/2470-1262-2024-3-49-58
Abstract: Aims and Objectives: The study aims to analyze the controversial fragments of “Պատմութիւն Հայոց” (“History of Armenia”) by Movses Khorenatsi and propose a new interpretation of the lines referring to the diadem and plants mentioned in the context of Lady Satennik. The main tasks include studying the etymology and meanings of Old Armenian words, exploring folklore, literary, and biblical sources, and analyzing mistakes made by scribes in manuscript copying.
Methodology and Research Methods: The research is based on a comparative analysis of dictionary entries and folklore texts, the study of Armenian chronicles, and the application of linguistic and historical-cultural approaches. Special attention is given to the comparison of Movses Khorenatsi’s works with biblical data, the philosophical writings of Eznik of Kolb, as well as folk songs and traditions.
Results: A new reading of the disputed lines is justified as a symbolic description of Satennik’s desires. It is established that references to plants, such as lettuce and rhubarb, should not be interpreted literally. Instead, these plants are interpreted as metaphors expressing Satennik’s longing for Artavan’s royal attributes and personal qualities. The article also analyzes possible scribal errors that affected the meaning of the text and suggests corrections.
Theoretical Contribution: This research contributes to the understanding of Armenian historiography and cultural heritage by revealing the nuances of thought and metaphorical language used in ancient texts. It also demonstrates the importance of careful analysis of manuscript sources and the role of interpretation in comprehending Old Armenian literature.
Practical Relevance: The results can be valuable for research projects on Armenian literature and folklore, as well as for educational programs on the history of Armenian culture. The study’s materials can facilitate further exploration of Old Armenian texts and aid in developing more accurate translations and interpretations.
Keywords: Movses Khorenatsi, «Պատմութիւն Հայոց» (“History of Armenia”), Satennik, Artavan, Old Armenian literature, folklore, linguistic analysis, Armenian historiography, Eznik of Kolb, ethnographic culture
References:
- Agatangelea “Patmuthivn Hayoc“, 1983t, Yerevan.
- Ararat Kharibyn, Rus – hayeren bararan. 1968t. Yerevan
- Astuacashunch matean Hine ev Nor ktataranac. 1929t. Vienna.
- Eznka Kokhbacvo “Excumn agandoc“. 1762t. Kostandnupolis.
- Faustosi Bivzandacvo “Patmuthivn Hayoc“. 1887t. Yerevan.
- Grigor Narekaci, “Taxq“.
- Hay – ruseren bararan. 1984t. Yerevan.
- Hovhannes Thumanyan, Erkeri jogovacu, 1958t. Yerevan.
- Hovhannu Kathokhikosi Draskhanakertecvo “Patmuthivn Hayoc“. 1912t. Thiflis.
- Hr. Acharyan, “Armatakan bararan“, 1973t. Yerevan.
- Khachik Dashtenc, “Khodedan“, 1960t. Yerevan.
- Movsisi Khorenacvo “Patmutivn Hayoc“, 1913t. Tpkhis.
- Nahapet Quchak, “Harivr u mek hayren“. 1988t. Yerevan.
- Nor Bargirq Haykazean Lezui. 1979t. Yerevan.
- Sasunci Davith, 1939t. Yerevan.
- Svetonios, “Tasnerku kesarneri kyanqe“. 1986t. Erevan.
- Ukhtanesi Episkoposi “Patmutivn Hayoc“. 1871t. Vagarshapat.
Information about the Author:
Haykanush A. Hovhannisyan (Yerevan, Armenia) – a linguist specializing in the Old Armenian language, a researcher at the NAS RA Institute of Language after H. Acharyan in Yerevan, Armenia.
ORCID: 0000-0003-2531-2182
e-mail:hajkanush@list.ru
For citation: Hovhannisyan Haykanush A., (2024). A New Interpretation of Movses Khorenatsi’s Lines.
Cross-Cultural Studies: Education and Science, Vol. 9, Issue 3 (2024), pp. 49-58 (in USA)
Manuscript received 18/10/2024
Accepted for publication: 24/11/2024