Recording Kaghakatsi Armenian Speech and Traditions

Transcription

1 Recording Kaghakatsi Armenian Speech and Traditions By an agreement between the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities and the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia, and with the approval and active support of the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem, between June 24 and August 4, 2001 research was carried out by Dr. Theo Maarten van Lint, of Leiden University, into the dialect and traditions of a group of Armenians in Jerusalem known as the Kaghakatsi's. This name, which means "Urbanites", "City Dwellers", designates the group of Armenian families which resided in Jerusalem's Old and New Cities before the Genocide of the Armenians perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire in 1915 and the following years. Kaghakatsi's claim presence in Jerusalem for various centuries, in some cases from the Crusader period and the time of the Cilician Armenian Kingdom, while claims are also made for a continuous Armenian presence from before the birth of Christ. The Kaghakatsi's are to be distinguished from the Armenian clergy, present in Jerusalem and the Holy Land from the fifth century at least. Kaghakatsi's are to be distinguished also from the refugees that came to Jerusalem during the Genocide, referred to as the Gaghtakans, the "Diasporians", or Vanketsi's, "Monasterians", because of their being housed on the premises of the Monastery of Sts James, also the See of the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem. The Kahakatsi's were recognised as a separate group not only because of their sustained presence in the Holy Land, but also because of their social status and their particular speech. Especially before the establishment in 1929 of Surp Tarkmanchats (The Holy Translators), the Armenian School, the Kaghakatsi's speech was a markedly distinct variety of Armenian with a strong Arabic and some Turkish influence. Most of the Kaghakatsi's do not recognize it as a distinct form of Armenian, but refer to it as a mixture of Armenian and Arabic, characterised by the use of protracted vowels and a sing-song intonation which they attribute to Arabic influence. This perception is carried by a strongly normative, prescriptive notion of what constitutes proper speech. The children who went to the Armenian school brought Standard Western Armenian to the houses which to a certain extent was absorbed by the older generation as well and gradually supplanted the Kaghakatsi dialect, resulting in the local variety of Standard Armenian as most of the dwindling group of Kaghakatsi's are able to speak today. From a scholarly point of view, the gradual elimination of Kaghakatsi Armenian as a means of expression among the Kaghalatsi's due to a risen level of education in Standard Armenian, to emigration and to the passing away of the older speakers, made a recording of this dialect a matter of the greatest urgency. The more so, because Kaghakats'i Armenian has never attracted the attention of linguists versed in Armenian dialectology or otherwise, and no recordings or descirptions of their speech are known to exist. A first investigation was carried out in 1999 by Dr. Bert Vaux,

2 Professor of Linguistics at Harvard University, with financial aid of the Armenian Studies Program of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Professor Vaux is also responsible for the linguistic follow up of the recording carried out during the 2001 research period. The urgency of the need to collect material was realised by Dr. Michael E. Stone, Professor of Armenian Studies at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, who undertook steps to make scholarly investigation possible. An agreement was made with the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, represented by Mr. Bob Lapidot, Director of the International Division, and the Academy of Sciences of Armenia, represented by the Vice President, Academician Gevorg Brutian. Permission to carry out the research in the Armenian Quarter was granted by His Beatitude, Archbishop Torkom Manoogian, Patriarch of Jerusalem. Thanks to preliminary work instigated by Prof. Stone, a list of names of persons still capable of speaking the Kaghakatsi dialect or retaining a vivid memory of it was drafted. Three people were instrumental in doing so: Dr. Roberta Ervine (St. Nersess Theological Seminary, New Rochelle, NY), who taught at Surb Targmanchats School and lived in the Armenian Quarter for over a decade, Jacqui Gourlay-Hagopian (Australia), and Prof. Abraham Terian (St. Neress Theological Seminary). The two persons last mentioned are Kaghakatsi's themselves. Dr. Vaux also contributed names of people from his 1999 research visit. Upon the researcher's arrival in Jerusalem, these namens were presented to Mr. Garabed Hagopian, the Taghabed, who deals with the secular affairs of the Armenians living in the Armenian Quarter of the Old City, in his Office in the Armenian Patriarchate. Mr. Hagopian expressed his full support and directed his aide, Mr. David Kaplanian, to undertake steps to facilitate the researcher's introduction to the speakers. Mr. Kaplanian showed himself not only fully aware of the urgency of the task, but also instructed the researcher in the background of the people. He pointed out that among the Kaghakatsi's old and young, a straight connection exists between esteem for education and versatility in Modern Standard Armenian, with the consequence of a low esteem enjoyed by Kaghakatsi speech as a compromised form of Armenian, often carried by people of little education, or at least so in Armenian. A barrier of embar-rasment about a perceived inadequate form of Armenian therefore would have to be reckoned with and to be overcome, Mr. Kaplanian explained. He helped the researcher in doing so by personally introducing the project to a number of people, and by providing the researcher with the necessary telephonenumbers. Additional explanatory conversations were held with several people by Mr. Tsolak Momjian, Honorary Consul of Armenia in Israel, and letters to this effect were written by Mr.

3 Harutyun Hagopian, a Kaghakatsi from Australia with close relatives still residing in the Armenian Quarter. Their help is here gratefully acknowledged. In the course of the ensuing interviews, many Kaghakatsi's of their own account provided further names of people, in some cases new to the researcher. Here the contributions made by Mr. Apkar Zakarian and his wife, Mr. Apkar Hagopian and his family, Mr Aram Khachadourian and Mrs. Vartuhi Hokeyian are gratefully recalled. In the following period interviews were held with fourteen people, in a number of cases stretching over two separate recording sessions. In seven cases people declined to be recorded, some because they did not consider themselves proper sources of either Kaghakatsi speech or traditions, others because of illness. In one case contact was deemed impossible by Kaghakatsi contacts because of the perceived danger in traveling to the place where the person lives. With still others only telephone contact was established which could not be followed up. The esteem for the speech of the Kaghakatsi's became the subject of sometimes lively discussions. Some people were receptive to the notion of its uniqueness and its worth to be preserved as an expression of part of the Armenia people's speech and habits. Others, even if they may have disagreed about this, were willing to provide information. On the other hand, it was in some cases not easy to convince people, highly educated or not, of the value of their contribution to the research. The seemingly neutral task of recording speech material thus proved to be riddled with elements of sociological and anthropological interest, which are worth pursuing in future research. Questions asked were drawn from two sources. The first one is a small Questionnaire set up by the researcher, aiming at the registration of longer periods of uninterrupted speech and at providing information on Kaghakatsi traditions. The second one consistied of parts of the words and sentences laid down in the Program for the Collection of Material for a Dialectological Atlas of Armenian (Erevan 1977) set up by the Institute of Linguistics of the Academy of Sciences of the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic. Recording was carried out on mini cd's of high quality, guaranteeing a reliable In this way a wealth of material was collected. Kaghakatsi Armenian is present in both forms, as longer periods of uninterrupted speech and in separate words and sentences. It displays peculiarities in lexicon, intonational pattern, phonology, morphology and syntax, the analysis of which is to be carried out. It is possible to make some preliminary assumptions about the variety of Armenian spoken by the Kaghakatsi's. The dialect spoken by the Kaghakactsi's group before they went to the Armenian school is composed of at least three elements. The oldest stratum is the variety of Armenian which the forebears of the families brought with them to Jerusalem, the contemporary (in some cases) and subsequent stratum of Turkish influence, and a growing influence of Arabic due to the environment the Kaghakatsi's lived in. This influence reached such proportions that Arabic was and is

4 often used not only as a means of communication with the local population, but also among Armenians themselves in the street and even in the homes. In the case of families who have been present in Jerusalem since Crusader times the Arabic stratum is likely to be older than the Turkish one. The establishment in 1929 of Surb Targman-chats heralded a new phase in the development of the Armenian spoken by the Kaghakatsi's and meant its cessation as a means of everyday use, as many of the older people gradually absorbed what the younger generation spoke.it is clear that a strong motive behind this process was and is the desire to express one's Armenianness by means of correct, Standard Armenian. Self-perception as an Armenian by command of the language is an important factor in the identity of the people all over the world, and this concept plays a role in the attitude towards the traditional Kaghakatsi speech. That so little Kaghakatsi speech can be heard today not only has to do with its ousting by Standard (Jerusalem) Armenian, but also by the fact that many Kaghakatsi's are fluent in Arabic, and enjoy expressing themselves in it. The level of influence of three fur-ther possible elements, Gaghtakan Armenian, the Armenian spoken by the clergy and the Classical Armenian used in worship seems to be minimal in comparison with that of the Armenian School. A further important factor in the decline of Kaghakatsi Armenian is the transformed role the group plays in the Armenian community and in the country. Until the war between Israel and the Arabic countries in 1948 the Kaghakatsi's enjoyed a high status as well educated people speking good English and Arabic. As such they were highly esteemd in the period of the British Mandate. Some had also held positions of consequence in the Ottoman administration, and were versed in Turkish as well. In 1948 those Kaghakatsi's who possessed houses in territory that was governed by the state of Israel lost most of it when they sought refuge against the war in the Armenian Monastery. They built up their lives from scratch, with a greatly affected social status in the Armenian community at large as in the world outside- and high esteem within the Kaghakatsi group for their eventual achievements. After 1967, when the whole of Jerusalem came under Israeli rule they found their status greatly reduced, amongst others because of the general rise in the level of education, thus depriving them of one of their assets. This has led, as it does with other groups of the Armenian community in Jerusalem, to the emigration of the younger generation, often followed by the elderly. As a consequence, the Kahakatsi group now consists of a few hundred people. Delving into the speech of the Kaghakatsi's also meant accentuating the initial differences with the Gaghtakans, whose arrival in Jerusalem prompted the Kaghakatsi's to extensive help programs and to the adoption of orphans into their families. At the same time the differences between the two groups were marked and this had consequences for their relationship with one another. One of these differences was the particular speech of the Kaghakatsi's with its large element of Arabic words, which prompted negative reactions from the Gaghtakans. It is clear that these differences have since long been overcome. A second field of interest are the traditions and historical role of the Kaghakatsi's in Armenian life in jerusale and the Holy Land. The Kaghakatsi's have their own church, Surp Hreshdagabedats, the Church of the Holy Archangels, in which they enjoy

5 certain rights not normally conceded to lay people. One of the three Armenian Clubs in Jerusalem is a Kaghakatsi establishment, aimed at providing welfare to people in need and promoting the social and cultural life among the Armenian Community. Each year on April 24th, the three Clubs together commemorate the Armenian Genocide. The office of Lusarar is hereditary in one of the Kaghakatsi families. A special event in which this transpires is at Easter, in the carrying of the candle alighted in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre (Surp Harutyun, Holy Resurrection in Armenian) and bring it running to the Patriarch's Residence. Many traditions the Kahgakatsi's used to maitain are closely tied to the yearly circle of ecclesiastical feasts and fasts. Particular arrangement of the table at the various feastdays, types of pastry and their often Arabic names, as well as the habits in marriageproposals and the wedding ceremony are among the subject that might be further pursued, and which, like the speech, are not transmitted to the younger generations anymore. Several people among the Kaghakatsi group have professed an interest in the histroy and traditions of their own group, while the Patriarchate often receives letters from Kaghakatsi's all over the world asking for information about their genealogies. It is clear that research carried out by qualified persons, and there are some among the Kaghakatsi's themeselves, would be a rewarding endeavour in preserving and attesting to the unique place of this group of Armenians in its most special environment of Jerusalem and the Holy Land as well as in the history and language of the Armenian people. The Armenian Quarter, Old City, Jerusalem, August 2, 2001 Theo Maarten van Lint