Historical Foundations: Armenia’s Adoption of Christianity and the Role of Gregory the Illuminator

Armenia is historically recognized as the first nation to adopt Christianity as its official religion, around 301 C.E., under the leadership of King Tiridates III, who was converted through the missionary efforts of Gregory the Illuminator (ca. 257–331 C.E.). Gregory, educated in Caesarea of Cappadocia, returned to Armenia late in the third century to evangelize his homeland. His success, aided by local nobility and Christianized elements of the Hellenistic and Syrian traditions, laid the groundwork for the Armenian Church.

At this early stage, before the development of a distinct Armenian alphabet, biblical and liturgical texts were interpreted orally and translated from Greek and Syriac. This period of oral translation led to the early exposure of Armenian Christianity to multiple textual traditions, forming the foundation for its later written Scripture.

Mesrop Mashtots and the Birth of the Armenian Alphabet

The Armenian literary tradition, and with it the Armenian version of the Bible, was formally established in the early fifth century. This development was spearheaded by Mesrop Mashtots (ca. 361–439 C.E.), who, alongside the Catholicos Sahak (ca. 350–439 C.E.), recognized the need for a unique script to stabilize the Armenian language and safeguard Christian doctrine. Around 406 C.E., Mesrop, assisted by Rufanos of Samosata, created the Armenian alphabet—comprising thirty-six characters largely based on Greek, with some derived from Syriac.

The creation of this script enabled the systematic translation of Scripture and other ecclesiastical texts. The earliest translated book was Proverbs, followed by the entire New Testament and, soon after, the Old Testament. This initial translation effort (often labeled “Arm 1”) was completed between 406–414 C.E., primarily from an Old Syriac base. By the mid-fifth century, following the Council of Ephesus (431 C.E.), the Armenian Bible underwent a significant revision (“Arm 2”), this time based on Greek manuscripts brought from Constantinople.

Textual Base of the Armenian Version: Old Syriac and Greek Traditions

The Arm 1 translation of the New Testament reflects heavy Syriac influence, closely related to the Old Syriac Gospels and even Tatian’s Diatessaron. Early Armenian inclusion of non-canonical texts—such as the Third Epistle to the Corinthians and Ephrem’s Diatessaron Commentary—further underscores the Syriac base. This influence is especially evident in Arm 1 manuscripts of the Gospels.

The Arm 2 revision attempted to align the Armenian text more closely with the Greek tradition, largely utilizing a text resembling the “Early Koine” or proto-Byzantine family, particularly Greek family 1 (f1). Scholars have debated whether Arm 2 reflects the so-called Caesarean text-type, but mounting evidence indicates it represents a transitional text that combines early Greek textual witnesses with remnants of Syriac renderings.

Manuscript Evidence and the Zohrab Edition

The Armenian version is preserved in more extant manuscripts than any ancient version except the Latin Vulgate. The earliest dated MS is a copy of the Gospels from 887 C.E., and a large number of MSS stem from the ninth to twelfth centuries.

Despite this abundance, the primary printed edition used in critical apparatuses, that of Yovhannes Zohrab (1805), is problematic. His base text derives from the late Cilician recension, which had undergone noticeable influence from both the Latin Vulgate and Greek Byzantine texts, as evidenced in passages like the Lord’s Prayer and the Pericope Adulterae. Although valuable for its time, the Zohrab edition is unreliable for reconstructing the fifth-century Arm 2 text. Not only is the textual base flawed, but the apparatus lacks transparency—citing manuscripts without identifying them or their variant readings with sufficient breadth.

The Importance of a Critical Edition and Current Research Efforts

The need for a new critical edition of the Armenian Bible has long been recognized. In 1969, the Armenian Apostolic Church initiated a project to produce a reliable critical edition, coordinated by the Mashtots Institute of Manuscripts (Matenadaran) in Yerevan. OT volumes have been slowly published. Work on the NT progresses with more difficulty due to the sheer volume and complexity of the manuscripts.

Among the most advanced tools developed is the Leiden-Jerusalem Armenian Database (LJADB), which contains digitized texts of key Gospel manuscripts (e.g., Matenadaran MSS 6200 and 2374) and is aiding critical editions with tools like optical scanners and collation software.

Modern text-critical methodology—such as the Colwell-Tune Method and the Claremont Profile Method—has allowed the classification of Armenian manuscripts into major groups. The largest group (Group Z) includes the Zohrab text and represents a stable textual tradition extending from the ninth century onward. A smaller group (Group W) includes earlier and often more erratic manuscripts with singular readings and provincial characteristics.

Apocryphal Inclusions and Their Textual Significance

A defining characteristic of the Armenian Bible is its inclusion of apocryphal and pseudepigraphal works not generally accepted in canonical lists. Among these are The History of Joseph and Asenath, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, and 3 Corinthians. These were likely inherited from Syriac Christianity and included in the Arm 1 corpus. The OT apocrypha preserved in Armenian manuscripts is extensive and includes The Vision of Enoch the Just, The History of Moses, and the longer recension of 4 Ezra (including the lost verses 7:36–105 found in no other version).

These texts not only show the Armenian version’s early connection to the broader Eastern Christian tradition but also serve as valuable witnesses to the transmission of early Jewish and Christian literature.

Colophons and Unique Textual Witnesses

A notable feature of Armenian biblical manuscripts is the presence of colophons—scribal notes often containing contemporary historical or theological commentary. A significant colophon from 989 C.E. ascribes the ending of Mark (16:9–20) to “the presbyter Ariston.” While some have linked this figure to Aristion mentioned by Papias (early second century), the majority of Armenian Gospel manuscripts—over one hundred—omit Mark 16:9–20, ending at verse 8, thus aligning with early Alexandrian manuscripts such as Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus.

Additionally, several manuscripts omit key interpolations, such as Luke 22:43–44 (Jesus’ bloody sweat) and Mark 1:1’s υἱοῦ θεοῦ (“Son of God”). These omissions suggest that the Arm 2 tradition may have preserved a more original form of the text in several places than the Greek manuscripts that include such additions.

Transmission and Modern Textual Analysis

Because no complete manuscripts from the first four centuries of the Armenian Bible have survived, scholars rely on indirect evidence: early patristic citations, ancient liturgical texts, and early Georgian versions (translated from Armenian). Collations of lectionaries, commentaries (especially those of Ephrem the Syrian), and parallel translations help reconstruct the lost Arm 1 text.

The presence of Old Syriac renderings in the early Armenian and Georgian texts shows the enduring influence of Syriac Christianity in the region, particularly before the dominance of Byzantine ecclesiastical authority in the fifth century and later.

A few manuscripts of Acts and the Catholic Epistles—especially those used in the Beuron Project—demonstrate strong textual affiliation with the Alexandrian Greek text-type. Revelation, though translated early, was not canonically accepted in Armenia until the twelfth century. Conybeare’s analysis of Revelation reveals a transmission history involving both Latin and Greek base texts, with later revisions conforming to Greek textual standards.

Current and Future Projects

Efforts are ongoing to catalog and digitize Armenian biblical manuscripts, develop consistent sigla for citation in apparatuses, and publish new critical editions. The International Project on the Text of Acts (IPTA) is spearheading the effort to publish an Armenian Acts critical edition, representing the Arm 2 text as it existed in the fifth century, complete with stemmatic relationships and a full apparatus.

Work is also underway to publish previously unedited fragments and biblical citations found in early Armenian liturgical and patristic texts. These studies promise to further clarify the early transmission of the Armenian NT and its relationship with both Syriac and Greek traditions.